[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2167?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Steven Rowe updated LUCENE-2167:
--------------------------------
Attachment: LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch
This is the benchmarking patch brought up-to-date with trunk, and with
NewStandardTokenizer added in to the list of tested tokenizers.
Here are the results on my machine (Sun JDK 1.6.0_13; Windows Vista/Cygwin;
best of five):
||Operation||recsPerRun||rec/s||elapsedSec||
|NewStandardTokenizer|1268450|654,852.88|1.94|
|UAX29Tokenizer|1268451|679,042.31|1.87|
|StandardTokenizer|1262799|680,021.00|1.86|
|RBBITokenizer|1268451|575,261.25|2.20|
|ICUTokenizer|1268451|557,315.88|2.28|
NewStandardTokenizer is consistently slower than UAX29Tokenizer and
StandardTokenizer, but still faster than the ICU implementation; it appears
that URL and Email tokenization have slowed things down a little bit. IMHO,
recognizing them is worth taking a small hit in throughput.
> Implement StandardTokenizer with the UAX#29 Standard
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2167
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2167
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: contrib/analyzers
> Affects Versions: 3.1
> Reporter: Shyamal Prasad
> Assignee: Steven Rowe
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch,
> LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch, LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch,
> LUCENE-2167-lucene-buildhelper-maven-plugin.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch
>
> Original Estimate: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0.5h
>
> It would be really nice for StandardTokenizer to adhere straight to the
> standard as much as we can with jflex. Then its name would actually make
> sense.
> Such a transition would involve renaming the old StandardTokenizer to
> EuropeanTokenizer, as its javadoc claims:
> bq. This should be a good tokenizer for most European-language documents
> The new StandardTokenizer could then say
> bq. This should be a good tokenizer for most languages.
> All the english/euro-centric stuff like the acronym/company/apostrophe stuff
> can stay with that EuropeanTokenizer, and it could be used by the european
> analyzers.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
