[GitHub] [lucene] jpountz commented on pull request #11875: Usability improvements for timeout support in IndexSearcher

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

jpountz commented on PR #11875:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/11875#issuecomment-1298076313

   Sorry for the lag I'm on vacation.
   
   The problem with "this class may be useful outside of Lucene" to me is that it could apply to any class in Lucene. We did indeed make some classes public on this criterion in the past (e.g FixedBitSet), but I would like the bar to be high, is there really not a better way? Is the need to make this class public a sign that the functionality is not exposed the right way?
   
   For the case described above by Vigya, I can think of two alternatives we might want to consider instead:
    - Copy the code for this time-limiting bulk scorer instead of using the Lucene class. If there is only a couple users of Lucene who would benefit from this class being public, maybe it's a better trade-off to let them take full ownership of this code to allow Lucene to keep treating it as an implementation detail?
    - Figure out different refactors that would help OpenSearch leverage timeout support from IndexSearcher as-is. E.g. if it would fold the logic to use live docs to lead iteration in the weight wrapper, would that work?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


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