its not slower: http://blogs.oracle.com/jrose/entry/longjumps_considered_inexpensive
I don't understand the thing about the booleanquery. On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Anne Veling <a...@beyondtrees.com> wrote: > Yes, I saw that. I would expect that to be slower. It also would not always > work as expected if the collector would be combined in a booleanquery I > guess. > Anne > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 15:29, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Anne Veling <a...@beyondtrees.com> wrote: >> > Ah thanks. I will make the change, ensure all tests are succeeding, add >> > some >> > tests of my own, and commit a patch. Would be great to get a feeling of >> > the >> > performance impact. >> > The change I'm making is changing the Collector interface from >> > public void collect(int doc) to >> > public boolean collect(int doc) >> > With a default "false" return code. If a collector returns "true" the >> > caller >> > may stop collecting. So all normal collectors would simply return >> > "false". >> > This could introduce some performance overhead of adding a return value >> > to >> > the call stack, and some checking in the calling code. >> > However, for some other use cases, like >> > >> >> usually the trick here to stop collecting is to throw a >> runtimeexception (your own subclass that you can catch), like >> timelimitingcollector. >> >> -- >> lucidimagination.com >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> > > > > -- > Anne Veling > BeyondTrees.com > +31 6 50 969 170 > @anneveling > > -- lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
