That's the cause of the problem.
Result is an intersection of two result sets and one of them is large
enough.
I have some ideas about this, but it's for some future.
With best regards,
Alexander Veremyev.
Sebi wrote:
+(countryID:1) - is executed in 2.07 sec and found 9116 results.
----- Original Message ----
From: Alexander Veremyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Sebi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2007 11:09:06 PM
Subject: Re: [fw-general] zend_search_lucene: Is this a bug? Error after adding
x number of documents? (ver. 0.8.0)
What about
3. countryID:1
query?
And what is the size of result set of this query?
With best regards,
Alexander Veremyev.
Sebi wrote:
Hi Alex,
I tested another index created in the past (which includes about 13.000
documents) and the I got the following times (this indexer is bigger):
1. +(((titleSrch:arte)) ((descriptionSrch:arte)) ((tagsSrch:arte))) is made in
0.079 sec
2. +(((titleSrch:arte)) ((descriptionSrch:arte)) ((tagsSrch:arte)))
+(countryID:1) is made in 0.89 sec
The index is optimized. The first query has 229. The last query has 190 results.
----- Original Message ----
From: Alexander Veremyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Sebi Petreanu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2007 10:21:29 PM
Subject: Re: [fw-general] zend_search_lucene: Is this a bug? Error after adding
x number of documents? (ver. 0.8.0)
Hi Sebi,
Sebi Petreanu wrote:
Hello guys,
I read your messages and I'm sorry you couldn't find a solution. I had the
same problems when I tried to index my documents. you can see some of these
errors here:
http://www.nabble.com/Zend_Search_Lucene-errors-tf3205213s16154.html#a8900427.
I had this problem only on WinXP system. I want to make the following
observations:
- When AntiVirus is running the errors appears more often.
- When I place a wait time between consecutive functions calls that
access the index (delete(), find(), addDocument()) the probability to index
all documents is increased. I actually succeeded to index 8000 documents
using a wait time between consecutive functions calls.
Thanks for your comments!
One additional question. Is indexing performed in "exclusive" mode (or
do you have any parallel search/index updating tasks during indexing
your documents)?
Parallel searching/indexing/updating must work correctly, but it
important to find where the bug is.
Alexander, I have a little question regard the search optimizations. Why the
second query so bad search times compared with the first one?
1. +(((titleSrch:arte)) ((descriptionSrch:arte)) ((tagsSrch:arte))) is made
in 0.077 sec
2. +(((titleSrch:arte)) ((descriptionSrch:arte)) ((tagsSrch:arte)))
+(countryID:1) is made in 0.50 sec
The difference is huge. What do you think?
First query is optimized to one multi-term query. Second can't be
reduced to a primitive query:
1. => "titleSrch:arte descriptionSrch:arte tagsSrch:arte"
or
"titleSrch:arte OR descriptionSrch:arte OR tagsSrch:arte"
2. => "+(titleSrch:arte descriptionSrch:arte tagsSrch:arte) +countryID:1"
or
"(titleSrch:arte OR descriptionSrch:arte OR tagsSrch:arte) AND countryID:1"
Other thing which may affect performance is searched term selectivity.
Please check execution time of "countryID:1" query.
PS I have an idea how to improve performance of boolean queries, which
has clauses with large result sets.
But I am not sure I'll have time for this before 0.9
That would be good if you will have possibility to send me your index,
which gives these results, or make an Jira issue to have it in mind.
With best regards,
Alexander Veremyev.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
____________________________________________________________________________________
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news
