[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1437?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12644938#action_12644938
]
Mark Harwood commented on LUCENE-1437:
--------------------------------------
This may now be a valid optimisation but without a use case.
I have subsequently found that I can get significantly better performance
repeatedly calling IndexReader.docFreq(term) for a large ordered list of terms
than I can calling TermEnum.skipTo(term) and then TermEnum.docFreq().
I can't find anywhere else that uses TermEnum.skipTo so this optimisation now
seems somewhat redundant.
> Faster skipTo on SegmentTermEnum
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1437
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1437
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 2.4
> Reporter: Mark Harwood
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: fasterSkip.patch
>
>
> I've been trying to speed up function I have that involves calling
> TermEnum.skipTo a lot on a very large index with many terms.
> This patch avoids excessive object creation of Term objects as part of the
> default implementation in the TermEnum base class.
> My tests output with this patch was as follows:
> Took 1894 ms for 42304 calls to skipTo on index with 182693176 docs
> and unmodified Lucene 2.4 results were:
> Took 2438 ms for 42304 calls to skipTo on index with 182693176 docs
> The logic is based on the existing code in SegmentTermEnum. scanTo(Term term)
> and avoids the object construction code found in the TermEnum.skipTo code
> which repeatedly calls next() and term() to create Term objects.
> Anyone see any negative side effects in changing this?
--
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]
