[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4540?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13598239#comment-13598239
 ] 

Karol Sikora edited comment on SOLR-4540 at 3/11/13 7:55 AM:
-------------------------------------------------------------

I've compared hihghligher between 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 from 
http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_2_r1453694/
In each case I've indexed the same data set(1000 documents), and executed the 
same query
hl.useFastVectorHighlighter: "true",
q: "uid:12345",
hl.q: "some_phrase",
hl.fl: "fulltext_*",
fl: "true

Results:
4.0 QTime ~ 60ms
4.1 QTime ~ 2600ms (!)
4.2 QTime ~ 16100ms (!!)

This is a big regression beetween 4.0 and 4.1, but QTime in 4.2 is horribly 
dramatic.
                
      was (Author: elektrrrus):
    In solr 4.0 this behaviour does not exists. It's regression between 4.1 and 
4.0.
                  
> High QTime when wildcards in hl.fl are used
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-4540
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4540
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: highlighter
>    Affects Versions: 4.1
>         Environment: Debian 6, Java 1.6.0_26 (Oracle)
>            Reporter: Karol Sikora
>
> I have indexed documents with fileds named like fulltext_[some id].
> I'm testing highlighting on document which have only one that field, 
> fulltext_1234.
> When 'fulltext_*' is provided as hl.fl, QTime is horribly big (> 10s), when 
> explicit 'fulltext_1234' is provided, QTime is acceptable (~30ms).
> I'm using fastVectorHighliter in both cases.

--
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]

Reply via email to