On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Evan Daniel<[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Daniel Cheng<[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Evan Daniel<[email protected]> wrote: >>> On my (incomplete) spider index, the index file for the word "the" (it >>> indexes no other words) is 17MB. This seems rather large. It might >>> make sense to have the spider not even bother creating an index on a >>> handful of very common words (the, be, to, of, and, a, in, I, etc). >>> Of course, this presents the occasional difficulty: >>> http://bash.org/?514353 I think I'm in favor of not indexing common >>> words even so. >> >> Yes, it should ignore common words. >> This is called "stopword" in search engine termology. >> >>> >>> Also, on a related note, the index splitting policy should be a bit >>> more sophisticated: in an attempt to fit within the max index size as >>> configured, it split all the way down to index_8fc42.xml. As a >>> result, the file index_8fc4b.xml sits all by itself at 3KiB. It >>> contains the two words "vergessene" and "txjmnsm". I suspect it would >>> have reliability issues should anyone actually want to search either >>> of those. It would make more sense to have all of index_8fc4 in one >>> file, since it would be only trivially larger. (I have a patch that I >>> thought did that, but it has a bug; I'll test once my indexwriter is >>> finished writing, since I don't want to interrupt it by reloading the >>> plugin.) >> >> "trivially larger" ... >> ugh... how trivial is trivial? >> >> the xmllibrarian can handle index_8fc42.xml on its own but all other >> 8fc4 on index_8fc4.xml. >> however, as i have stated in irc, that make index generation even slower. > > 8fc42 is 17382 KiB. All other 8fc4 are 79 KiB combined. > > Also, it would make index generation faster. The spider first does > all the work of creating 8fc4, then discards it to recreate the > sub-indexes. The vast majority of this work is in 8fc42, which gets > created twice. Not splitting the index would nearly halve the time to
It don't get created twice, it shortcut early. see the estimateSize variable in IndexWriter. > create the 8fc4 set of indexes. > > Of course, a more efficient algorithm for creating the indexes in the > first place would both make it far faster and make the two take > approximately the same time. > > Evan Daniel > _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
