[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12655854#action_12655854
]
Tim Sturge commented on LUCENE-1487:
------------------------------------
Mark, Otis, looking back over the bug history I totally see where you are
coming from; I do look like I've just dumped this here without explanation
which wasn't my intention.
Honestly I don't really know how useful this is; I think there's a set of cases
where it works very well but how comparatively large that set is I am unsure.
You can think of it as adding a level of indirection (from documents to terms)
to filtering.
The alternative (at least as far as I can see) is to do a union by term of
sorted docid lists (which is fundamentally what a DisjunctionQuery does I
think). There may well be other options.
> FieldCacheTermsFilter
> ---------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1487
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1487
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: 2.4
> Reporter: Tim Sturge
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: FieldCacheTermsFilter.java
>
>
> This is a companion to FieldCacheRangeFilter except it operates on a set of
> terms rather than a range. It works best when the set is comparatively large
> or the terms are comparatively common.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
