Thanks Mike. I did not phrase well my understanding of Cache reload. I didn't mean literally as part of the reopen, but *because* of the reopen. Because FieldCache is tied to an IndexReader instance, after reopen it gets refreshed. If I keep my own Cache, I'll need to code that logic, and I prefer to use what's currently in Lucene. (Sloth? :) )
I'll look at the mentioned function queries. Thanks for the pointer ! Shai On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Michael McCandless < luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Shai Erera<ser...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 1) Refactor the FieldCache API (and TopFieldCollector) such that one can > > provide its own Cache of native values. I'd hate to rewrite the > > FieldComparators logic just because the current API is not extendable. > That > > I agree should be quite straightforward, but I'll need to look into it > > first. > > +1 > > Or, so that the current consumers of FieldCache (that hardwire to > FieldCache.DEFAULT) could simply accept any other FieldCache > instance, as Hoss suggested. > > > 2) Contribute my payload-based sorting package. Currently it only reads > from > > disk during searches, and I'd like to enhance it to use in-memory cache > as > > well. It's a moderate-size package, so this one will need to wait until > (1) > > is done, and I get enough time to adapt it to 2.9 and work on the issue. > > +1, sounds cool! > > > I definitely don't think this should be a 2.9 sort of work, unless > someone > > else volunteers to do it. I can't pull (1) together that quickly. > > Me too... 2.9 train is moving out of the station now! > > > I thought that FieldCache is loaded when the IndexReader is reopened no? > I > > mean, it's a per IndexReader instance no? If not, then I'll need to > rethink > > the entire approach, because then (1) may not be that important anymore. > > FieldCache is only opened on demand, ie, the first time that a newly > opened reader calls FieldCache.DEFAULT.getXXX does it get populated. > > So it's not during the reopen... it's during the first query that eg sorts > by a field. > > It'd be great if your use case gives us enough clarity on LUCENE-831 > to make concrete progress. > > Note that function queries already "wrap" FieldCache w/ an alternate API > for native value per doc (ValueSource, DocValues, FieldCacheSource), > that do allow custom ValueSources to be provided. It'd be great if > as part of LUCENE-831 they could be more unified w/ FieldCache's > API. > > Mike > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
