lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hoss Man (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-383) ConstantScoreRangeQuery - fixes "too many clauses" exception
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:42:56 GMT
    [ ] 

Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-383:

I hadn't heard about Doug's plans that Yonik refered to (to revamp all Query classes to support
a constant score option) so forgive me if this is way off the mark:

If Doug's plan is fairly solid and just needs to be cranked out, then by all means it might
make sense to go that route intstead of having seperate ConstantScoreRange and ConstantScorePrefix
queries ... but if that plan is still very hypotheitcal, then perhaps the best course of action
would be to commit Yonik's existing code into the contrib section.  

Nothing here requires any changes to the core codebase, and as of 1.9 the contrib code will
start being reved/released on teh same schedule as the core correct? ... so there's really
no downside to putting it in contrib.  If the other idea falls through, then this code could
be "promoted" from contrib to the core (and perhaps then QueryParser could be changed to use
it by default).  If the other plan does get implimented, then these classes can be deprecated
in favor of the new ones (and their new API)

> ConstantScoreRangeQuery - fixes "too many clauses" exception
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>          Key: LUCENE-383
>          URL:
>      Project: Lucene - Java
>         Type: Bug
>   Components: Search
>     Versions: 1.4
>  Environment: Operating System: other
> Platform: Other
>     Reporter: Yonik Seeley
>     Assignee: Lucene Developers
>  Attachments:,,,
> ConstantScoreQuery wraps a filter (representing a set of documents) and returns
> a constant score for each document in the set.
> ConstantScoreRangeQuery implements a RangeQuery that works for any number of
> terms in the range.  It rewrites to a ConstantScoreQuery that wraps a RangeFilter.
> Still needed:
>   - unit tests (these classes have been tested and work fine in-house, but the
> current tests rely on too much application specific code)
>   - code review of Weight() implementation (I'm unsure If I got all the score
> normalization stuff right)
>   - explain() implementation
> NOTE: requires Java 1.4 for BitSet.nextSetBit()

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
For more information on JIRA, see:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message