iverase commented on pull request #709:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/709#issuecomment-1053335430
+1 That would hide the implementation details from users.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
wjp719 edited a comment on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053190677
> This looks very similar to the implementation of `Weight#count` on
`PointRangeQuery` and should only perform marginally faster? It's uncreal to me
whether this PR buys us
Tomoko Uchida created LUCENE-10445:
--
Summary: Reproducible assertion failure in
o.a.l.luke.models.documents.TestDocumentsImpl.testNextTermDoc
Key: LUCENE-10445
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10427?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17498591#comment-17498591
]
Suhan Mao commented on LUCENE-10427:
[~jpountz] Thanks for your reply!
As I know,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10427?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17498591#comment-17498591
]
Suhan Mao edited comment on LUCENE-10427 at 2/27/22, 1:38 PM:
---
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10427?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17498591#comment-17498591
]
Suhan Mao edited comment on LUCENE-10427 at 2/27/22, 1:39 PM:
---
kiranchitturi opened a new pull request #2644:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2644
* Since Solr supports multi-valued fields, it would be crucial for Solr SQL
to provide support for users to filter multi-valued fields via SQL
* Support syntax like `WHERE mv_field = 'a' a
iverase commented on pull request #687:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/687#issuecomment-1053981720
I like this idea but I agree with Adrien that the API change does not look
right. More over, I don't think we need to add it to PointValues as this is
something specific for Index
14 matches
Mail list logo
