[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6735?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16237342#comment-16237342
]
Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-6735:
-------------------------------------
> Unfortunately, we don't have a good escape mechanism while naming fields
Yes, I see. It's just something to remember next time: don't just append
"_facet" or so, as it might collide with a real property name. Make sure there
can be no collisions, for example by using the ":" prefix.
For now, I'm afraid the only thing we can do is cross fingers that nobody is
every going to use property names ending with "_facet".
> field name like "synthetically-falliable-field"
Yes, looks much better now.
> Lucene Index: improved cost estimation by using document count per field
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-6735
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6735
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: lucene, query
> Affects Versions: 1.7.4
> Reporter: Thomas Mueller
> Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Priority: Major
> Labels: doc-impacting
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11
>
> Attachments: IndexReadPattern.txt, LuceneIndexReadPattern.java,
> OAK-6735.patch
>
>
> The cost estimation of the Lucene index is somewhat inaccurate because (by
> default) it just used the number of documents in the index (as of Oak 1.7.4
> by default, due to OAK-6333).
> Instead, it should use the number of documents for the given fields (the
> minimum, if there are multiple fields with restrictions).
> Plus divided by the number of restrictions (as we do now already).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
