[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12366?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16499152#comment-16499152
 ] 

David Smiley commented on SOLR-12366:
-------------------------------------

{quote}Nice catch, this stuff has been broken forever!
{quote}
Thanks; and a lot of credit goes to [~millerjeff0] for the profiling that 
revealed the slow-down.
{quote}MultiFields has slow methods as well
{quote}
Sure. I meant it's more explicit as to what you actually need – do you need an 
entire LeafReader or just a MultiTerms perhaps or Multi-something else.  Plus, 
SlowAtomicReader was kicked out of Lucene so if there's an easy alternative 
that solves the task at hand, as was the case in some cases in this patch, then 
lets just use that.
{quote}A variable name change for "SolrIndexSearcher.leafReader"
{quote}
+1 yeah, like slowLeafReader

> Avoid SlowAtomicReader.getLiveDocs -- it's slow
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-12366
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12366
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>          Components: search
>            Reporter: David Smiley
>            Assignee: David Smiley
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 7.4
>
>         Attachments: SOLR-12366.patch, SOLR-12366.patch, SOLR-12366.patch, 
> SOLR-12366.patch
>
>
> SlowAtomicReader is of course slow, and it's getLiveDocs (based on MultiBits) 
> is slow as it uses a binary search for each lookup.  There are various places 
> in Solr that use SolrIndexSearcher.getSlowAtomicReader and then get the 
> liveDocs.  Most of these places ought to work with SolrIndexSearcher's 
> getLiveDocs method.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

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

Reply via email to