[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5299?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Shikhar Bhushan updated LUCENE-5299:
------------------------------------

    Comment: was deleted

(was: patch and benchmarks to come...)

> Refactor Collector API for parallelism
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-5299
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5299
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Shikhar Bhushan
>         Attachments: benchmarks.txt, LUCENE-5299.patch
>
>
> h2. Motivation
> We should be able to scale-up better with Solr/Lucene by utilizing multiple 
> CPU cores, and not have to resort to scaling-out by sharding (with all the 
> associated distributed system pitfalls) when the index size does not warrant 
> it.
> Presently, IndexSearcher has an optional constructor arg for an 
> ExecutorService, which gets used for searching in parallel for call paths 
> where one of the TopDocCollector's is created internally. The 
> per-atomic-reader search happens in parallel and then the 
> TopDocs/TopFieldDocs results are merged with locking around the merge bit.
> However there are some problems with this approach:
> * If arbitary Collector args come into play, we can't parallelize. Note that 
> even if ultimately results are going to a TopDocCollector it may be wrapped 
> inside e.g. a EarlyTerminatingCollector or TimeLimitingCollector or both.
> * The special-casing with parallelism baked on top does not scale, there are 
> many Collector's that could potentially lend themselves to parallelism, and 
> special-casing means the parallelization has to be re-implemented if a 
> different permutation of collectors is to be used.
> h2. Proposal
> A refactoring of collectors that allows for parallelization at the level of 
> the collection protocol. 
> Some requirements that should guide the implementation:
> * easy migration path for collectors that need to remain serial
> * the parallelization should be composable (when collectors wrap other 
> collectors)
> * allow collectors to pick the optimal solution (e.g. there might be memory 
> tradeoffs to be made) by advising the collector about whether a search will 
> be parallelized, so that the serial use-case is not penalized.
> * encourage use of non-blocking constructs and lock-free parallelism, 
> blocking is not advisable for the hot-spot of a search, besides wasting 
> pooled threads.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to