[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BLUR-220?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ravikumar updated BLUR-220:
---------------------------
Attachment: FullRowReindexing.java
"Now I think it's possible that we could come up with a mixed approach where
use the join query for recently updated rows and then merge them fully
(somehow) back into the segment as back-to-back documents again without
reindexing the entire row again."
Even though I do not understand why we need this, I have attached an
experimental patch that avoids re-indexing an entire row but still copies
relevant row-data to newer segments.
We create a FilteredAtomicReader that allows only docs with the input rowId and
just copy over all data to newer segments and also delete these docs in older
segments.
Do let know if this comes anywhere near to what you are looking for.
> Support for humongous Rows
> --------------------------
>
> Key: BLUR-220
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BLUR-220
> Project: Apache Blur
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Blur
> Affects Versions: 0.3.0
> Reporter: Aaron McCurry
> Fix For: 0.3.0
>
> Attachments: Blur_Query_Perf_Chart1.pdf, CreateIndex.java,
> CreateIndex.java, CreateSortedIndex.java, FullRowReindexing.java,
> MyEarlyTerminatingCollector.java, test_results.txt, TestSearch.java,
> TestSearch.java
>
>
> One of the limitations of Blur is size of Rows stored, specifically the
> number of Records. The current updates are performed on Lucene is by
> deleting the document and re-adding to the index. Unfortunately when any
> update is perform on a Row in Blur, the entire Row has to be re-read (if the
> RowMutationType is UPDATE_ROW) and then whatever modification needs are made
> then it is reindexed in it's entirety.
> Due to all of this overhead, there is a realistic limit on the size of a
> given Row. It may vary based the kind of hardware that is being used, as the
> Row grows in size the indexing (mutations) against that Row will slow.
> This issue is being created to discuss techniques on how to deal with this
> problem.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
