[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3141?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13211409#comment-13211409
]
Uwe Schindler commented on SOLR-3141:
-------------------------------------
100 segments?
In comparison the numbers for Lucene 2.9 lowered extensively, pre-2.9
optimizing was often a must, I agree! The problem was Multi* with itsself
having priority-queue like structures slowing down term enumeration and
postings rerieval. With Lucene 3.x the difference between an optimized and a
"standard 8 segment index" was always below measurement uncertainity (see lots
of benchmarks from Mike on Lucene 4). For standard relevance-ranked or numerics
sorting there was never a real slowdown.
I am always talking about relevance-ranked results and numerics. With
StringIndex sorting there is certainly an overhead, but as we support
sortMissingLast now also for numerics, almost nobody has to use it.
> Deprecate OPTIMIZE command in Solr
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-3141
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3141
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: update
> Affects Versions: 3.5
> Reporter: Jan Høydahl
> Labels: force, optimize
> Fix For: 3.6
>
>
> Background: LUCENE-3454 renames optimize() as forceMerge(). Please read that
> issue first.
> Now that optimize() is rarely necessary anymore, and renamed in Lucene APIs,
> what should be done with Solr's ancient optimize command?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
