Solr
  1. Solr
  2. SOLR-1728

ResponseWriters should support byte[], ByteBuffer

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Only BinaryResponseWriter supports byte[] and ByteBuffer. Other writers also should support these

        Activity

        Hide
        Hoss Man added a comment -

        There is no indication that anyone is actively working on this issue, so removing 4.0 from the fixVersion.

        Show
        Hoss Man added a comment - There is no indication that anyone is actively working on this issue, so removing 4.0 from the fixVersion.
        Hide
        Robert Muir added a comment -

        rmuir20120906-bulk-40-change

        Show
        Robert Muir added a comment - rmuir20120906-bulk-40-change
        Hide
        Hoss Man added a comment -

        bulk fixing the version info for 4.0-ALPHA and 4.0 all affected issues have "hoss20120711-bulk-40-change" in comment

        Show
        Hoss Man added a comment - bulk fixing the version info for 4.0-ALPHA and 4.0 all affected issues have "hoss20120711-bulk-40-change" in comment
        Hide
        Robert Muir added a comment -

        3.4 -> 3.5

        Show
        Robert Muir added a comment - 3.4 -> 3.5
        Hide
        Robert Muir added a comment -

        Bulk move 3.2 -> 3.3

        Show
        Robert Muir added a comment - Bulk move 3.2 -> 3.3
        Hide
        Hoss Man added a comment -

        Bulk updating 240 Solr issues to set the Fix Version to "next" per the process outlined in this email...

        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-dev/201005.mbox/%3Calpine.DEB.1.10.1005251052040.24672@radix.cryptio.net%3E

        Selection criteria was "Unresolved" with a Fix Version of 1.5, 1.6, 3.1, or 4.0. email notifications were suppressed.

        A unique token for finding these 240 issues in the future: hossversioncleanup20100527

        Show
        Hoss Man added a comment - Bulk updating 240 Solr issues to set the Fix Version to "next" per the process outlined in this email... http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-dev/201005.mbox/%3Calpine.DEB.1.10.1005251052040.24672@radix.cryptio.net%3E Selection criteria was "Unresolved" with a Fix Version of 1.5, 1.6, 3.1, or 4.0. email notifications were suppressed. A unique token for finding these 240 issues in the future: hossversioncleanup20100527
        Hide
        Yonik Seeley added a comment -

        Seems to make sense from a completeness point of view. It also allows a closer semantic mapping (i.e. we could use the closest equivalent to byte arrays for python & ruby).

        Show
        Yonik Seeley added a comment - Seems to make sense from a completeness point of view. It also allows a closer semantic mapping (i.e. we could use the closest equivalent to byte arrays for python & ruby).
        Hide
        Noble Paul added a comment -

        Everything works now in non-distributed search because , the BinaryField takes care of writing out the data as strings. In distributed search ,when the writers have to emit SolrDocument and if it contains byte[], XML, JSON and other response writers would do a toString() on the byte[].

        Show
        Noble Paul added a comment - Everything works now in non-distributed search because , the BinaryField takes care of writing out the data as strings. In distributed search ,when the writers have to emit SolrDocument and if it contains byte[], XML, JSON and other response writers would do a toString() on the byte[].
        Hide
        Hoss Man added a comment -

        Noble: your issue description is a bit terse, so i'm a little confused.

        Are you suggesting an API change such that binary write methods are added to QueryResponseWriter (making it equivalent to BinaryQueryResponseWriter) ?

        Or are you suggesting that the existing classes which implement QueryResponseWriter ( JSONResponseWriter, PHPResponseWriter, PythonResponseWriter, XMLResponseWriter, etc...) should start implementing BinaryQueryResponseWriter?

        In either case: what's the motivation?

        Show
        Hoss Man added a comment - Noble: your issue description is a bit terse, so i'm a little confused. Are you suggesting an API change such that binary write methods are added to QueryResponseWriter (making it equivalent to BinaryQueryResponseWriter) ? Or are you suggesting that the existing classes which implement QueryResponseWriter ( JSONResponseWriter, PHPResponseWriter, PythonResponseWriter, XMLResponseWriter, etc...) should start implementing BinaryQueryResponseWriter? In either case: what's the motivation?

          People

          • Assignee:
            Noble Paul
            Reporter:
            Noble Paul
          • Votes:
            1 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:

              Development