[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14293625#comment-14293625
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-4835:
--------------------------------------
If there is to be an arbitrary limit, I think it should be much lower, not
higher. That way poor people may be more likely to hit it in testing rather
than in production as their system grows.
But really, I disagree with having any arbitrary limit. The performance curve
as one adds terms is nice and smooth. Adding in an arbitrary limit creates a
bug in *working* code (your system suddenly stops working when you cross a
threshold), to try and prevent a hypothetical code bug ( "someone who has a bug
in their code and accidentally keeps adding to the same BQ" ).
But this hypothetical code bug off continuously adding to the same BQ would
lead to either an OOM error, or array store error, etc... ,basically something
that would be caught at test time. And really, there are *hundreds* of places
in code where you can accidentally continuously add to the same data
structure... ArrayList, StringBuilder, etc. It would be horrible to have
arbitrary limits for all of these things.
> Raise maxClauseCount in BooleanQuery to Integer.MAX_VALUE
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4835
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4835
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 4.2
> Reporter: Shawn Heisey
> Fix For: 4.9, Trunk
>
>
> Discussion on SOLR-4586 raised the idea of raising the limit on boolean
> clauses from 1024 to Integer.MAX_VALUE. This should be a safe change. It
> will change the nature of help requests from "Why can't I do 2000 clauses?"
> to "Why is my 5000-clause query slow?"
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
