[hibernate-dev] moving Hibernate Search to Lucene 2.9

[Emmanuel Bernard]

On 14 déc. 2009, at 11:15, Sanne Grinovero wrote:

> Even though I'm ok with breaking index compatibility,
> it looks like option "2" will not break compatibility per-se
> (other features might) as they state the same compression algorithm is
> being used, just
> they don't apply it automatically anymore (and the Store.Compress
> isn't defined in 3.0)

So today (2.4) they use a binary format to store the compressed data?

> Actually option "1" (dropping support for Compression) would break it,
> in case you are
> having compressed field.

right unless we simulate what they did before exactly.
What's the rational for dropping the support on their side?

> 
> The numbers/dates indexing and new rangequeries will force us to drop
> backwards compatibility,
> unless we implement those later on keeping the old broken strategy.

You lost me, what is that?