[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2669?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-2669:
----------------------------------

    Attachment: LUCENE-2669.patch

Here a patch that fixed NRTE to only seek forward. This should also improve 
NRQ's perf in trunk.

It works like the following:

# nextSeekTerm() checks that the next range already fits the *current* term. If 
not it forwards to the next sub-range and returns a seek term that is at least 
greater or equal the *current* term
# accept() checks for the non-hit case (seldom as for a NRQ most terms are hits 
until the upper sub-range-bound is reached), if the next sub-range lower bound 
term on the stack is greater that the *current* one, and only then returns 
NO_AND_SEEK. If this is not the case, it does not seek but instead only move 
forward to the next sub-range and repeats the bounds checks [for(;;) loop].

> NumericRangeQuery.NumericRangeTermsEnum sometimes seeks backwards
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2669
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2669
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Search
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>             Fix For: 3.1, 4.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2669.patch, LUCENE-2669.patch
>
>
> Subclasses of FilteredTermsEnum are "supposed to" seek forwards only (this 
> gives better performance, typically).
> However, we don't check for this, so I added an assert to do that (while 
> digging into testing the SimpleText codec) and NumericRangeQuery trips the 
> assert!
> Other MTQs seem not to trip it.
> I think I know what's happening -- say NRQ has term ranges a-c, e-f to seek 
> to, but then while it's .next()'ing through the first range, the first term 
> after c is f.  At this point NRQ sees the range a-c is done, and then tries 
> to seek to term e which is before f.  Maybe NRQ's accept method should detect 
> this case (where you've accidentally .next()'d into or possibly beyond the 
> next one or more seek ranges)?

-- 
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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to