Thanks Mark ,
this gets me moving. I will look into it somewhere soon.
Geert-Jan
markrmiller wrote:
>
> Like I said, its pretty easy to add this, but its also going to suck.
> Kind of exposes the fact that its missing the right extensibility at the
> moment. Things are still a bit ugly ov
Like I said, its pretty easy to add this, but its also going to suck.
Kind of exposes the fact that its missing the right extensibility at the
moment. Things are still a bit ugly overall.
Your going to need new CacheKeys for the data types you want to support.
A CacheKey builds and provides a
That ArrayObject suggestion makes sense to me. It amost seemed to be as if
you were referring as this option (or at least the interfaces needed to
implement this) were already available as 1 out of 2 options available in
831?
Could you give me a hint at were I have to be looking to extend what y
But isn't this pluggability / visibility issues resolved with using
lucene-831? Or did you roll-your-own before 831 was available?
PabloS wrote:
>
> I have the same problem with cache and too many sorted fields, and had to
> implement a big workaround to be able to plug my own cache implementa
Its hard to predict the future of LUCENE-831. I would bet that it will
end up in Lucene at some point in one form or another, but its hard to
say if that form will be whats in the available patches (I'm a contrib
committer so I won't have any real say in that, so take that prediction
with a gra
I have the same problem with cache and too many sorted fields, and had to
implement a big workaround to be able to plug my own cache implementation in
lucene 2.3.2. What I'd really like to see in the new cache implementation is
easier pluggability and extension of the lucene classes, which is curre
Hi,
I recently saw activity on LUCENE-831 (Complete overhaul of FieldCache
API/Implementation) which I have interest in.
I posted previously on this with my concern that given the current default
cache I sometimes get OOM-errors because I have a lot of fields which are
sorted on, which ultimate
