[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4563?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13500258#comment-13500258
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-4563:
------------------------------------
Not much -- only the top-K facet ordinals are labeled. Also, the taxo-reader
holds a cache, so if you typically label a certain set of categories, the index
is likely to never, or very rarely be hit.
I think that maybe during indexing this might help, but not sure. Also, it may
result in a smaller size taxonomy index.
> DirTaxoWriter's Codec - rely on default or use custom?
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4563
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4563
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: modules/facet
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Shai Erera
> Priority: Minor
>
> Today, DirTaxoWriter opens an IndexWriter using the default Codec. While
> running tests, I noticed that some of them take a veeeeery long time to
> complete, some times. Debugging, I realized that they use SimpleText codec
> b/c that's what the test-framework drew at random.
> That got me to think if we should really depend on the default Codec, or use
> a special codec that is more suitable for the taxonomy index's unique
> characteristics. Basically, the taxonomy index has two fields:
> # One in which the category path is saved, as StringField, and therefore each
> term is associated with exactly one document
> # Another field with one term, such that a category's parent is written in
> the position of that term for every document.
> Initially, I thought that we should really be using PulsingCodec. After a
> brief chat about it w/ Robert, he said that Lucene41 Codec acts like pulsing
> for fields like that. So I'm thinking that we should either:
> * Hard-code to Lucene41, if it's indeed useful.
> * Write a completely new Codec, that is special for that case. I.e. Lucene41
> may handle these cases efficiently, but its code needs to be prepared for
> other cases too, therefore we may be able to write something more efficient.
> I open that as a placeholder, I think that we should first come up w/ a
> decent benchmark test in order to validate the results. The benchmark package
> now contains some facet related stuff, so I'll take a look if that's enough.
--
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]
