OK, never mind <G>....

Erick

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Earwin Burrfoot <ear...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My issue is with extra objects created in the process. Field selection
> can be handled with, well, FieldSelector.
>
> 2010/2/25 Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>:
> > Does LazyLoading address this? I'm assuming your issue is
> > that the default behavior loads the entire document regardless
> > of whether you actually want all the fields.....
> > Erick
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Earwin Burrfoot <ear...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm thinking, should Lucene introduce new interface to read stored
> >> document fields?
> >>
> >> Current 'Document document(int n)' mechanism is barely usable due to
> >> overhead involved. While I believe underlying index structure works
> >> pretty fast (if it fits in memory, as is the case for most
> >> performance-concerned installations), there's no adequate access to it
> >> and people are forced to introduce contraptions like LinkedIn's
> >> payload-assisted luceneId<->appId mapping or similar caches we employ.
> >>
> >> What I am thinking about is something along the lines of existing
> >> iterators like TermDocs/TermPositions. Iterate over docs, then iterate
> >> over fields stored for each, extract data, ???, profit.
> >> Comments?
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>

Reply via email to