[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13287380#comment-13287380
]
Chris Male commented on LUCENE-3312:
------------------------------------
I am all for the decoupling too, just want to thoroughly kick the tyres on this
one :D I dont want another FieldType like discussion.
{quote}
Document.add is just type overloaded, but Document.get* will get
messier: we'll need getStored and getIndexed? I guess that would be
simpler if Document could just store Field instances... hmm.
{quote}
Perhaps if we just limit the API in Document we can handle this okay. We can
provide the overloaded add methods, two get methods and 1 remove method.
{quote}
Maybe IndexDocument? I think it's OK as an interface if we mark it
@lucene.internal? This is the raw, super expert low-level that indexer
uses to consume documents... it has only 2 methods, and I think for
expert users it could be a hassle if we force the impl to inherit from
our base class...
{quote}
+1 to both the name and the handling of the interface.
{quote}
Should StoredDocument (returned from IR.document) be "read only"? Like
you can iterate its fields, look them up, etc., but not eg remove them?
{quote}
+1 You shouldn't really need to remove fields, you can achieve that by not
retrieving them in the first place
> Break out StorableField from IndexableField
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3312
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Nikola Tankovic
> Labels: gsoc2012, lucene-gsoc-12
> Fix For: Field Type branch
>
> Attachments: lucene-3312-patch-01.patch, lucene-3312-patch-02.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-03.patch, lucene-3312-patch-04.patch
>
>
> In the field type branch we have strongly decoupled
> Document/Field/FieldType impl from the indexer, by having only a
> narrow API (IndexableField) passed to IndexWriter. This frees apps up
> use their own "documents" instead of the "user-space" impls we provide
> in oal.document.
> Similarly, with LUCENE-3309, we've done the same thing on the
> doc/field retrieval side (from IndexReader), with the
> StoredFieldsVisitor.
> But, maybe we should break out StorableField from IndexableField,
> such that when you index a doc you provide two Iterables -- one for the
> IndexableFields and one for the StorableFields. Either can be null.
> One downside is possible perf hit for fields that are both indexed &
> stored (ie, we visit them twice, lookup their name in a hash twice,
> etc.). But the upside is a cleaner separation of concerns in API....
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
