jpountz commented on PR #12460: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12460#issuecomment-1715238722
> I think this approach defeats on of the main purposes for this change, that is to avoid allocating a byte array when reading doc values. I don't think we want BinaryDocValues to do that lazily What is the problem with allocating lazily? It wouldn't make sense to me with the current API, where binaryValue() is the only way to retrieve the data, but if it were to only remain for bw compat it would make sense to me to only incur the byte[] overhead if the legacy `binaryValue()` API is used? > On my own use case, getting a DataInput is not enough as I need random access via get/set position, in a similar fashion to what I am doing now via ByteArrayDataInput. This has been a challenge so many times in the past, maybe it's time to add `seek()` support to `DataInput`? -- 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-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
