[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-18314?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

ASF GitHub Bot updated SOLR-18314:
----------------------------------
    Labels: pull-request-available  (was: )

> skip phrase field (pf) boost analysis for single-term queries since a 
> one-word phrase is semantically meaningless and wastes CPU
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-18314
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-18314
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: query parsers
>            Reporter: Ian Springer
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>          Time Spent: 10m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> When a query contains only a single term, the phrase fields (`pf`) parameter 
> still triggers full phrase analysis — constructing a query string, 
> instantiating a query parser, parsing, and only then discarding the result 
> because `minClauseSize=2` rejects single-term phrases. For `pf2`/`pf3` this 
> was already short-circuited (the shingle size check catches it), but `pf` 
> with `shingleSize=0` bypassed that guard and did all the work before throwing 
> it away. The same issue exists in classic DisMax where `getPhraseQuery` 
> unconditionally wraps the user query in quotes and parses it even for a 
> single token.
> This is pure wasted CPU on every single-term query that specifies `pf`, which 
> is the vast majority of search configurations. The fix is to add early 
> returns in both eDisMax (`addShingledPhraseQueries`) and DisMax 
> (`getPhraseQuery`) to bail out before any parsing work, when the resolved 
> phrase would contain fewer than 2 terms.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to