[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-940?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12676806#action_12676806
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-940:
------------------------------------
I have not followed this closely, so correct me if I am way off base...
Assuming TrieRange does all the number mojo needed in lucene, should it
eventually replace the existing number implementaions?
In solr 2.0, would it make sense that int,sint,float,sfloat, etc are all
implemented with TrieRange? Obviously we need to keep the existing field types
for 1.X
If this is true, should we deprecate the existing Number implementations for
1.4? perhaps just NumberUtils?
Should changing the schema version to 1.2 trigger using the TrieRange classes
rather then the NumberUtils classes? Becides supporting existing indexes, is
there any reason to keep the solr number formats rather then the Trie version?
> TrieRange support
> -----------------
>
> Key: SOLR-940
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-940
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Yonik Seeley
> Fix For: 1.4
>
>
> We need support in Solr for the new TrieRange Lucene functionality.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
