Quantcast

Clarfication on using Docvalues

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Clarfication on using Docvalues

aravinth thangasami
Hi all,

I'm trying to implement sort using DocValues.
As SortedDocValue is equivalent of pre-sorted BinaryDocvalue and
SortedNumericDocvalue is pre-sorted version of NumericDocvalue

I'm able to sort on NumericDocvalue Field but not on BinaryDocValue Field
Why Lucene allows sorting NumericDocValue field not in BinaryDocValue
though both internally stored as byte array

BinaryDocValue has field inverting cost
Does NumericDocValue doesn't have any inverting cost ??

Is there any other reason to support on NumericDocvalues



Thanks
Aravinth
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Clarfication on using Docvalues

Adrien Grand
It is possible to sort binary fields by using SortField.Type.STRING_VAL.

Le lun. 27 févr. 2017 à 17:51, aravinth thangasami <
[hidden email]> a écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying to implement sort using DocValues.
> As SortedDocValue is equivalent of pre-sorted BinaryDocvalue and
> SortedNumericDocvalue is pre-sorted version of NumericDocvalue
>
> I'm able to sort on NumericDocvalue Field but not on BinaryDocValue Field
> Why Lucene allows sorting NumericDocValue field not in BinaryDocValue
> though both internally stored as byte array
>
> BinaryDocValue has field inverting cost
> Does NumericDocValue doesn't have any inverting cost ??
>
> Is there any other reason to support on NumericDocvalues
>
>
>
> Thanks
> Aravinth
>
Loading...