IndexInternalID is now []byte
this is still opaque, and should still work for any future
index implementations as it is a least common denominator
choice, all implementations must internally represent the
id as []byte at some point for storage to disk
index id's are now opaque (until finally returned to top-level user)
- the TermFieldDoc's returned by TermFieldReader no longer contain doc id
- instead they return an opaque IndexInternalID
- items returned are still in the "natural index order"
- but that is no longer guaranteed to be "doc id order"
- correct behavior requires that they all follow the same order
- but not any particular order
- new API FinalizeDocID which converts index internal ID's to public string ID
- APIs used internally which previously took doc id now take IndexInternalID
- that is DocumentFieldTerms() and DocumentFieldTermsForFields()
- however, APIs that are used externally do not reflect this change
- that is Document()
- DocumentIDReader follows the same changes, but this is less obvious
- behavior clarified, used to iterate doc ids, BUT NOT in doc id order
- method STILL available to iterate doc ids in range
- but again, you won't get them in any meaningful order
- new method to iterate actual doc ids from list of possible ids
- this was introduced to make the DocIDSearcher continue working
searchers now work with the new opaque index internal doc ids
- they return new DocumentMatchInternal (which does not have string ID)
scorerers also work with these opaque index internal doc ids
- they return DocumentMatchInternal (which does not have string ID)
collectors now also perform a final step of converting the final result
- they STILL return traditional DocumentMatch (with string ID)
- but they now also require an IndexReader (so that they can do the conversion)
This optimization changes the search.Search.Next() interface API,
adding an optional, pre-allocated *DocumentMatch parameter.
When it's non-nil, the TermSearcher and TermQueryScorer will use that
pre-allocated *DocumentMatch, instead of allocating a brand new
DocumentMatch instance.
you can do a manual fuzzy term search using the FuzzyQuery struct
or, more suitable for most users the MatchQuery now supports
some fuzzy options. Here you can specify fuzziness and
prefix_length, to turn the underlying term search into a fuzzy
term search. This has the benefit that analysis is performed
on your input, just like the analyzed field, prior to computing
the fuzzy variants.
closes#82
