[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3393?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13450114#comment-13450114
]
Shawn Heisey commented on SOLR-3393:
------------------------------------
Adrien,
I've been looking at your patch, especially the warming code. I can't see
anything in there that maintains the frequency values from the old cache to the
new cache.
With maxFreq of 10 and a cache size much larger (200, 1000, etc), there's no
difference from the cache's perspective between something that has been
requested 50 times versus something that has been requested 100 times. How did
the maxFreq being related to the cache size make it slower?
> Implement an optimized LFUCache
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-3393
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3393
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: search
> Affects Versions: 3.6, 4.0-ALPHA
> Reporter: Shawn Heisey
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: SOLR-3393.patch, SOLR-3393.patch, SOLR-3393.patch,
> SOLR-3393.patch, SOLR-3393.patch, SOLR-3393.patch
>
>
> SOLR-2906 gave us an inefficient LFU cache modeled on
> FastLRUCache/ConcurrentLRUCache. It could use some serious improvement. The
> following project includes an Apache 2.0 licensed O(1) implementation. The
> second link is the paper (PDF warning) it was based on:
> https://github.com/chirino/hawtdb
> http://dhruvbird.com/lfu.pdf
> Using this project and paper, I will attempt to make a new O(1) cache called
> FastLFUCache that is modeled on LRUCache.java. This will (for now) leave the
> existing LFUCache/ConcurrentLFUCache implementation in place.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
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]
