I didn't say we won't need CSF, but that at least conceptually, CSF and my sort-by-payload are the same. If however it turns out that CSF performs better, then I'll definitely switch my sort-by-payload package to use it. I thought that CSF is going to be implemented using payloads, but perhaps I'm wrong.
Shai On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Yonik Seeley <yo...@lucidimagination.com>wrote: > On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Shai Erera<ser...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've resisted using payloads for this purpose in Solr because it felt > >> like an interim hack until CSF is implemented. > > > > I don't see it as a hack, but as a proper use of a great feature in > Lucene. > > It's proper use for an application perhaps, but not for core Lucene. > Applications are pretty much required to work with what's given in > Lucene... but Lucene developers can make better choices. Hence if at > all possible, work should be put into implementing CSF rather than > sorting by payloads. > > > CSF and this are essentially the same. > > In which case we wouldn't need CSF? > > -Yonik > http://www.lucidimagination.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
