On Saturday 15 April 2006 18:20, Jeff Rodenburg wrote: > What was the thinking behind making the BooleanQuery maxClauseCount a > static? Or, I guess more to the point, why not an instance setting as well? > > Not trying to point out a flaw, just curious about the original thinking > behind the setting. I have a situation where I have a set of BooleanQueries > that use a high number of clauses, but another set that needs a low number > of clauses (different indexes searched, and efficiencies dictate the > high/low clause range.)
The reason is to have simplicity in dealing with the case of a single BooleanQuery using many terms. This was done to avoid spurious OutOfMemory problems for queries that happen to expand to a lot of terms, and for that it works well. With nested BooleanQuerys it wouldn't even make sence to have an instance setting, because in that case the maximum number of clauses should be associated with the top level query only. Regards, Paul Elschot. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
