Dan Korostelev wrote: > 2008/12/27 Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com>: >> Dan Korostelev wrote: >>> I also made an implementation for the FieldIndex that may not be too >>> optimal, but I'm currently most interested in clean and universal >>> IIndexSort definition that any index could efficiently implement. >> I've done this work too... but outside zope.index... please see (for >> example): >> >> http://svn.repoze.org/repoze.catalog/trunk/repoze/catalog/indexes/field.py >> >> It's reasonably optimized. > > Thanks for the point. That's something I was going to write to add > optimizations for FieldIndex sorting, now I only need to adapt your > code and that's great! :-)
There are many tests in there too. Note that the algorithms came mostly from the Zope 2 Catalog code. The only things I'm less than sure about in there is: - the computation of when to use n-best and lazy (there are constants in there stolen from Zope 2). - The fact that when we need to sort in reverse order we can't be lazy. I.e. in the branch that reads: # If the result set is not much larger than the number # of documents in this index, or if we need to sort in # reverse order, use a non-lazy sort. BTree values can't be iterated in reverse order, that's why we don't try the lazy case here if it's a reverse sort. There may be a better way to do this. > However, the more important thing for now is the IIndexSort interface > declaration. Is it okay and fits any possible sortable index? ;-) > It looks like we came up with the same interface independently; I think that's a good sign. - C _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )