On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Uwe Schindler<u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >> That is one way, or you do it base64 encoded in a text field if don't >> care about space at all. :) just for clarification: one way Java Object Serialization - is not efficient at all It takes a lot of space and performance is crap. other way BASE64 encoded - might take even more space and time but uses string field
> > Lucene also have binary fields for storing. Searching on such fields does > not make sense, so its ok to not be able to index them (how should that > work). > > I have this use case, too. Sometimes it is senseful to store arbitrary > objects as stored fields in the index and use then e.g. when displaying > search results. This usecase is totally valid I just doubt that storing a java object in there make a lot of sense (By using Java Object Serialization) as it is so damn slow. Many efficient serialization methods are around to do that way faster in a compact way. simon > > Uwe > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
