[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16085452#comment-16085452
 ] 

Dawid Weiss commented on LUCENE-7905:
-------------------------------------

It'd probably have to be stored per-leaf of a binary tree the pq actually is. 
And then you'd need to maintain those prefix counts when pushing elements 
up/down the tree... The associated bookkeeping may not be worth it.

This said, an algorithm for this has probably been invented. Back in the 70s. :D

> Optimizations for OrdinalMap
> ----------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-7905
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7905
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Michael McCandless
>             Fix For: 7.1
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-7905.patch, LUCENE-7905.patch, 
> LUCENE-7905-specialized.patch
>
>
> {{OrdinalMap}} is a useful class to quickly map per-segment ordinals to 
> global space, but it's fairly costly to build, which must typically be done 
> on every NRT refresh.
> I'm using it quite heavily in two different places, one for 
> {{SortedSetDocValuesFacetCounts}}, and another custom usage, and I found some 
> small optimizations to improve its construction time.
> I switched it to use a simple priority queue to merge the terms instead of 
> the more general {{MultiTermsEnum}}, which does extra work since it must also 
> provide postings, implement seekExact, etc.
> I also pulled {{OrdinalMap}} out into its own oal.index class.
> When testing construction time for my case the patch is ~16% faster (159.9s 
> -> 134.2s) in one case with 91.4 M terms and ~9% faster (115.6s -> 105.7s) in 
> another case with 26.6 M terms.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

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

Reply via email to