[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12739138#action_12739138
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-1771:
--------------------------------------
bq. We do have to be back compat with Weight though - ugg - so QueryWeight
would somehow need to expose a deprecated working explain(IndexReader, int) ?
QueryWeight doesn't need a explain(IndexReader, int)... but perhaps
implementations of explain(IndexReader, Searcher, int) do need to handle a null
searcher. And no, the *output* of explain won't be 100% compatible (or 100%
accurate) but we're too far down the road of per-segment searching, and too
close to a release to fix that now IMO.
> Using explain may double ram reqs for fieldcaches when using
> ValueSourceQuery/CustomScoreQuery or for ConstantScoreQuerys that use a
> caching Filter.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1771
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1771
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Search
> Reporter: Mark Miller
> Assignee: Mark Miller
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1771.patch
>
>
--
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
