[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1821?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12744715#action_12744715
 ] 

Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1821:
-------------------------------------

I think we would prefer that you didn't cache by multi-reader. We want to 
encourage cache by segment.

In my mind, I don't think we should try and squeeze this into 2.9. We can see 
if anyone disagrees.

> Weight.scorer() not passed doc offset for "sub reader"
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1821
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1821
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Search
>    Affects Versions: 2.9
>            Reporter: Tim Smith
>
> Now that searching is done on a per segment basis, there is no way for a 
> Scorer to know the "actual" doc id for the document's it matches (only the 
> relative doc offset into the segment)
> If using caches in your scorer that are based on the "entire" index (all 
> segments), there is now no way to index into them properly from inside a 
> Scorer because the scorer is not passed the needed offset to calculate the 
> "real" docid
> suggest having Weight.scorer() method also take a integer for the doc offset
> Abstract Weight class should have a constructor that takes this offset as 
> well as a method to get the offset
> All Weights that have "sub" weights must pass this offset down to created 
> "sub" weights

-- 
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

Reply via email to