[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6179?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14278504#comment-14278504
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-6179:
---------------------------------------------------------
Commit 1652015 from [~jpountz] in branch 'dev/trunk'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1652015 ]
LUCENE-6179: Leftovers.
> Remove out-of-order scoring
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6179
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6179
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Assignee: Adrien Grand
> Fix For: 5.0, Trunk
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-6179.patch, LUCENE-6179.patch, bool_or.tasks
>
>
> Out-of-order currently adds complexity that I would like to remove. Here is a
> selection of issues that come from out-of-order scoring.
> - lots of specializations with collectors: we have two versions of every top
> score/field collector depending on whether it should support out-of-order
> collection or not
> - it feels like it should be an implementation detail of our bulk scorers
> but it also makes our APIs more complicated, eg.
> LeafCollector.acceptsDocsOutOfOrder
> - if you create a TopFieldCollector, how do you know if you should pass
> docsScoredInOrder=true or false? To make the decision, you actually need to
> know whether your query supports out-of-order scoring while the API is on
> Weight.
> I initially wanted to keep it and improve the decision process in LUCENE-6172
> but I'm not sure it's the right approach as it would require to make the API
> even more complicated... hence the suggestion to remove out-of-order scoring
> completely.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
