On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 23:08, Andi Vajda <va...@osafoundation.org> wrote: > > On Mar 18, 2009, at 13:01, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com> > wrote: > >> I think we should move TrieRange* into core before 2.9? >> >> It's received alot of attention, from both developers (Uwe & Yonik did >> lots of iterations, and Solr is folding it in) and user interest. >> >> It's a simpler & more scalable way to index numeric fields that you >> intend to sort and/or do range querying on; we can do away with tricky >> number padding. >> >> Plus it's just plain cool :) >> >> I also think we should change its name. I know and love "trie", but >> it's a very technical term that's not immediately meaningful to users >> of Lucene's API. Plus I've learned from doing too many renamings >> lately that it's best to try to get the name right at the start. >> >> Maybe just NumberUtils, IntRangeFilter, LongRangeFilter, >> AbstractNumberRangeFilter? > > +1 > > How about NumericRangeFilter ? The idea behind this filter can be applied to more than just numbers, so I'd like to put the stress on its speed or idea used - FastRangeQuery, TrieRangeQuery, SegmentedRangeQuery (from the fact it splits input range into variable-precision segments), PrefixRangeQuery (you can reword the algorithm in terms of prefixes)
-- Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (ear...@gmail.com) Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423 ICQ: 104465785 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
