You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Chris Male (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2011/06/23 02:38:47 UTC

[jira] [Created] (LUCENE-3232) Move MutableValues to Queries Module

Move MutableValues to Queries Module
------------------------------------

                 Key: LUCENE-3232
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3232
             Project: Lucene - Java
          Issue Type: Sub-task
            Reporter: Chris Male


Solr makes use of the MutableValue* series of classes to improve performance of grouping by FunctionQuery (I think).  As such they are used in ValueSource implementations.  Consequently we need to move these classes in order to move the ValueSources.

I'll also use this issue to establish the Queries module where the FunctionQueries will lie.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

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

Re: [jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-3232) Move MutableValues to Common Module

Posted by Chris Male <ge...@gmail.com>.

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Yonik Seeley <yo...@lucidimagination.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Chris Male (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >     [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3232?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel]
> >
> > Chris Male updated LUCENE-3232:
> > -------------------------------
> >
> >    Description:
> > Solr makes use of the MutableValue* series of classes to improve
> performance of grouping by FunctionQuery (I think).  As such they are used
> in ValueSource implementations.  Consequently we need to move these classes
> in order to move the ValueSources.
> >
> > As Yonik pointed out, these classes have use beyond just FunctionQuerys
> and might be used by both Solr and other modules.  However I don't think
> they belong in Lucene core, since they aren't really related to search
> functionality.  Therefore I think we should put them into a Common module,
> which can serve as a dependency to Solr and any module.
>
> My point was more about thinking about the package name up front - if
> it's in a more generic package, it can be easily moved to another
> module later if another module needs it.  Up to you if you want to
> create that common module up front, or wait until it's needed of
> course.
>

Yeah, you made a really good point.  I think its best to go for the module
straight away since its not a huge amount of effort and will end up being
the right way in the end.

Thanks for the review, most appreciated.


>
> -Yonik
> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Chris Male | Software Developer | JTeam BV.| www.jteam.nl

Re: [jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-3232) Move MutableValues to Common Module

Posted by Yonik Seeley <yo...@lucidimagination.com>.

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Chris Male (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3232?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
>
> Chris Male updated LUCENE-3232:
> -------------------------------
>
>    Description:
> Solr makes use of the MutableValue* series of classes to improve performance of grouping by FunctionQuery (I think).  As such they are used in ValueSource implementations.  Consequently we need to move these classes in order to move the ValueSources.
>
> As Yonik pointed out, these classes have use beyond just FunctionQuerys and might be used by both Solr and other modules.  However I don't think they belong in Lucene core, since they aren't really related to search functionality.  Therefore I think we should put them into a Common module, which can serve as a dependency to Solr and any module.

My point was more about thinking about the package name up front - if
it's in a more generic package, it can be easily moved to another
module later if another module needs it.  Up to you if you want to
create that common module up front, or wait until it's needed of
course.

-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com

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