dsmiley commented on PR #13178: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13178#issuecomment-1998018450
Problem: clarity in being able to turn it off; a -1 value would clarify the configuration intent. It has become even less useful, not that I quite wanted it in the first place in the past either. In the production clusters I work with, there are other limits (query parsing level enforced) and they are adequate. I could use a bunch of 9's and add a comment in the configuration but shouldn't Lucene let you turn it off? Why argue against a simple `if` condition for a check the user doesn't want to enforce. I understand your point that it probably costs pathetically little compared to executing the query anyway. However note the sad `TermInSetQuery.visit()` implementation. Additionally/alternatively, making getNumClausesCheckVisitor protected and non-static could be useful. Additionally/alternatively, remove this limit. Keep a sample QueryVisitor impl with instructional javadocs to show how trivial it is for a user to layer this on if they so choose (subclass `rewrite`) -- 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
