On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:11 PM, John Wang <john.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Makes lotta sense to me to wait for LUCENE-1458 then. Should I create an > issue with a depedency on 1458? Yes please open a new issue. > One application for this is within FieldCache construction of StringIndex: > > If we know the number of terms is small, the orderArray using an int per doc > is wasteful. In the case where we have 10 terms but 100M docs for a given > field, the orderArray would take up 400MB where as half a byte is > sufficient, which means 50MB is enough. (keep in mind this is per field!) > > To do such memory optimization now requires iterating the term table twice > to get the number, hence the movition for this feature. That sounds like a great improvement too! Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
