[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10023?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17381966#comment-17381966
 ] 

Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-10023:
---------------------------------------

To be clear I'm not opposed to doing analysis of doc-values fields, I just 
think that it's not core-enough to warrant changes to IndexingChain as opposed 
to Robert's approach of doing it on top of IndexingChain, e.g. with a custor 
Field.

> Multi-token post-analysis DocValues
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-10023
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10023
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core/index
>            Reporter: Michael Gibney
>            Priority: Major
>          Time Spent: 50m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> The single-token case for post-analysis DocValues is accounted for by 
> {{Analyzer.normalize(...)}} (and formerly {{MultiTermAwareComponent}}); but 
> there are cases where it would be desirable to have post-analysis DocValues 
> based on multi-token fields.
> The main use cases that I can think of are variants of faceting/terms 
> aggregation. I understand that this could be viewed as "trappy" for the naive 
> "Moby Dick word cloud" case; but:
> # I think this can be supported fairly cleanly in Lucene
> # Explicit user configuration of this option would help prevent people 
> shooting themselves in the foot
> # The current situation is arguably "trappy" as well; it just offloads the 
> trappiness onto Lucene-external workarounds for systems/users that want to 
> support this kind of behavior
> # Integrating this functionality directly in Lucene would afford consistency 
> guarantees that present opportunities for future optimizations (e.g., shared 
> Terms dictionary between indexed terms and DocValues).
> This issue proposes adding support for multi-token post-analysis DocValues 
> directly to {{IndexingChain}}. The initial proposal involves extending the 
> API to include {{IndexableFieldType.tokenDocValuesType()}} (in addition to 
> existing {{IndexableFieldType.docValuesType()}}).



--
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

Reply via email to