[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1145?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12561752#action_12561752
]
Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-1145:
--------------------------------------
When I wrote it, using the queueSize variable did make a minor difference in
performance.
But with the result you have, I think it's better use the size() call only.
> DisjunctionSumScorer small tweak
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1145
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1145
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Eks Dev
> Priority: Trivial
> Attachments: DisjunctionSumScorerOptimization.patch,
> DSSQueueSizeOptimization.patch, TestScorerPerformance.java
>
>
> Move ScorerDocQueue initialization from next() and skipTo() methods to the
> Constructor. Makes DisjunctionSumScorer a bit faster (less than 1% on my
> tests).
> Downside (if this is one, I cannot judge) would be throwing IOException from
> DisjunctionSumScorer constructors as we touch HardDisk there. I see no
> problem as this IOException does not propagate too far (the only modification
> I made is in BooleanScorer2)
> if (scorerDocQueue == null) {
> initScorerDocQueue();
> }
>
> Attached test is just quick & dirty rip of TestScorerPerf from standard
> Lucene test package. Not included as patch as I do not like it.
> All test pass, patch made on trunk revision 613923
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
