[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-18201 ]
Sonu Sharma deleted comment on SOLR-18201:
------------------------------------
was (Author: ercsonu):
I am going to work on this.
> "Range Field" types should have docValues support and associated optimizations
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-18201
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-18201
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: query
> Reporter: Jason Gerlowski
> Assignee: Jason Gerlowski
> Priority: Major
>
> Solr's recently-added "range field" types were added initially without
> support for docValues. At the time this was done primarily for simplicity.
> But also because the field types aren't particularly compelling candidates
> for sorting or faceting - doing so isn't necessarily tricky to implement, but
> it was hard to imagine use cases that would require users to even want to do
> this. However - in hindsight there are other benefits of docValues that make
> them worth supporting in these field types
> Consider the example query: `myStrField:someSelectiveFilter AND
> my_range_field:10`.
> Without docValues, the `my_range_field` portion of this query will traverse
> its entire BKD tree of field-values at creation time in order to build a
> bitset of docs matching this clause. This is an expensive operation, and the
> query doesn't benefit at all from the low-cost selective query clause that it
> is AND'd with. This can make the query quite slow if the Lucene "point" data
> structure for this field is large.
> DocValues allows this case to be optimized. The range-field clause can be
> wrapped in Lucene's "IndexOrDocValuesQuery", which is smart enough to use
> docValues if it detects that a lower-cost query is being used to drive
> result-set iteration.
> We should add docValues support to our "range field" types, and ensure that
> they make use of this potential optimization. *Our "range field" types
> haven't gone out the door yet, so we can make this change without worrying
> about backcompat, so it'd be great if we can get this in prior to 10.1's
> release. * Trying to add it post-10.1 would add a good bit of complexity.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
