Thanks a lot for the explanation. That's all I want to know :) Cheers,
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > Sorry for the slow response: this one almost fell past the event horizon > of my todo list ;) > > Do you mean you are using document blocks (IW.addDocuments) and block > grouping (BlockGroupingCollector)? > > Any merge policy is fine with that (merging cannot break up document > blocks), but with index time sorting, you'll need to sort primarily by X > (where X is indexed with the same value in parent and child documents), and > secondarily by "blockID" where blockID is a unique long doc value indexed > on each document in the block. That should preserve your blocks? > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Sheng <sheng...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sheng...@gmail.com');>> wrote: > >> Michael - That is a great article to read - thank you for the detailed >> explanation of the situation! We are not in production yet, so I am ok to >> wait a bit until 6 is in a more mature shape. For now, I am going to use a >> LogMergePolicy instead. That does bring up another question. As we are >> using Lucene-group, and as document suggests, index each group of documents >> in a single commit, so they can be in the same segment. Does it place any >> limitation on the merge policy we can use, as it is merging the segments >> and might break the deal ? Thanks again! >> >> On Wednesday, May 25, 2016, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','luc...@mikemccandless.com');>> wrote: >> >>> Sorry, yes, dimensional points and SlowCompositeReaderWrapper are not >>> compatible. >>> >>> This class (SlowCompositeReaderWrapper) is a terrible class that we have >>> been gradually (past 7 years) phasing out of Lucene. It's a leaky >>> abstraction ( >>> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.html) that >>> pretended your index has one segment when it doesn't, and it limited our >>> freedoms when developing new features. >>> >>> Finally just today, for 7.0 anyways, we succeeded: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7283 >>> >>> That said, we have also fixed index time sorting to no longer use >>> SlowCompositeReaderWrapper: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6766 >>> >>> Right now this is a 7.0 (master) only change but I plan to backport for >>> 6.2 once we get 6.1 released. Maybe you could test Lucene's current master >>> and confirm points and index-time sorting work correctly for you? >>> >>> Mike McCandless >>> >>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com >>> >>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Sheng <sheng...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> It makes a call to SlowCompositeReaderWrapper in line 103, which checks >>>> if >>>> field hasPointValues in line 68. If yes, it throws an exception "cannot >>>> wrap points". Does this essentially mean SortingMergePolicy cannot be >>>> used >>>> for index that has point values. If yes, what is the rationale behind >>>> it ? >>>> >>> >>> >
