lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shai Erera (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5178) doc values should expose missing values (or allow configurable defaults)
Date Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:49:52 GMT


Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-5178:

I see. I think this can also happen if you use RandomCodec and it draws Lucene42DVF? So in
this case, with this seed, it trips if you set postingsformat, but I'm not sure that in general
this assume() is correct.

The ugly part of having a test calling _TestUtil.geDVF(field) (or we wrap it in a nice method)
is that the test will need to decide up front on all the fields it uses, and if there's a
mistake, the error may happen in the future and harder to debug (i.e. spot that the test uses
a different field than what it passed to assume()). But I don't think that asserting the Codec
is the right test here, so this has to change.
> doc values should expose missing values (or allow configurable defaults)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-5178
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Yonik Seeley
>             Fix For: 5.0, 4.5
>         Attachments: LUCENE-5178.patch, LUCENE-5178_reintegrate.patch
> DocValues should somehow allow a configurable default per-field.
> Possible implementations include setting it on the field in the document or registration
of an IndexWriter callback.
> If we don't make the default configurable, then another option is to have DocValues fields
keep track of whether a value was indexed for that document or not.

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

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

View raw message