[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8050?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17076214#comment-17076214
]
juan camilo rodriguez duran commented on LUCENE-8050:
-----------------------------------------------------
[~dsmiley] I just added the PR with the changes, for the PerFieldPostingsFormat
we already check indexOption!=NONE in FreqProxTermsWriter:80
> PerFieldDocValuesFormat's merge should not grab field DVF if
> DocValuesType.NONE
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-8050
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8050
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Affects Versions: 6.3
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: LUCENE_8050.patch
>
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Since LUCENE-7456 (Lucene 6.3), PerFieldDocValuesFormat delegates the merge
> to the actual field DVF's merge. Great, but unfortunately it will call
> {{getDocValuesFormatForField}} on all fields (in FieldInfos) even those that
> have no DocValues (DocValuesType.NONE). It won't ultimately actually write
> anything to those DVFs but there may be some overhead and furthermore it's
> now more awkward to write a subclass of PFDVF that deliberately throws an
> exception from {{getDocValuesFormatForField}} for some fields.
> AFAICT this appears to be a non-issue for PerFieldPostingsFormat's merge
> because it's use of MultiFields filters out IndexOptions.NONE
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
