lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Indexing Numeric value in Lucene 4.10.4
Date Thu, 06 Apr 2017 15:21:57 GMT
bq: What are your opinions on this?

That this is not a sound approach. Why do you think Trie is expensive?
What evidence do you have at all for that? Strings are significantly
expensive relative to numeric fields. Plus, you can adjust the
precision step to reduce the "overhead" of a trie field.

I very strongly doubt that the index would be smaller with strings.
I'm certain comparisons would be slower. I really can't come up with
much of any reason why strings would be better.

Not to mention that sorting won't work unless you left-pad with zeros.

Best,
Erick

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 6:32 AM, aravinth thangasami
<aravinththangasami@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm  searching numeric value and will not perform range query on that field
> I thought of indexing it as String field instead of NumericField
> so that it will improve indexing time by avoiding numeric tries
>
> What are your opinions on this?
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Aravinth

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message