[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1614?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12713251#action_12713251
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-1614:
------------------------------------
I added testEmptyBucketWithMoreDocs in TestBooleanScorer which creates a
BooleanScorer that returns 3000 the first time nextDoc is called (or advance
with target <= 3000) and then NO_MORE_DOCS. It asserts that calling nextDoc()
once returns 3000 and the second time returns NO_MORE_DOCS.
Indeed, with the change I've made above it fails. So it's good that this test
is there now. It makes BS/BS2 one more testcase-proof. That means I cannot
remove 'more' ...
bq. The tests for boolean queries are quite comprehensive nowadays. So when all
tests pass, don't worry too much.
Paul, I guess we should always worry :). Anyway, now we can say that sentence
with a bit more confidence :).
bq. Also, I wonder if this can be removed, by init'ing the sub-scorers up front.
How about if I call nextDoc() when addScorer is called? I tried it and all
tests pass, which at least means there is no test case that fails (see above
comment). If I do this, I can also check if the result is NO_MORE_DOCS and
don't add it to the sub scorers list in the first place.
What do you think?
BTW, funny thing just happened - turns out we deprecated all of DISIs methods,
but not DISI itself. This is actually good since it allows us to keep DISI and
not deprecate Scorer and all the public DISIs that extend DISI. And it saves us
the effort of finding alternative names ... Just a thought.
Another thought of an optimization. Somewhere up this issue, we discussed
adding start() to DISI, just to get rid of firstTime in DisjunctionMaxScorer
and ConjunctionScorer. At least for DMS, I think I can remove add(Scorer) and
add to its ctor an array of Scorer[]. DMS is used by DMQ, and the number of
scorers is knows in advance.
Also, DMS can be changed quite a bit, not using ArrayList but an array.
ArrayList get/set methods do range checks every time you call them, and we're
calling them quite a lot.
> Add next() and skipTo() variants to DocIdSetIterator that return the current
> doc, instead of boolean
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1614
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1614
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1614.patch, LUCENE-1614.patch, LUCENE-1614.patch
>
>
> See
> http://www.nabble.com/Another-possible-optimization---now-in-DocIdSetIterator-p23223319.html
> for the full discussion. The basic idea is to add variants to those two
> methods that return the current doc they are at, to save successive calls to
> doc(). If there are no more docs, return -1. A summary of what was discussed
> so far:
> # Deprecate those two methods.
> # Add nextDoc() and skipToDoc(int) that return doc, with default impl in DISI
> (calls next() and skipTo() respectively, and will be changed to abstract in
> 3.0).
> #* I actually would like to propose an alternative to the names: advance()
> and advance(int) - the first advances by one, the second advances to target.
> # Wherever these are used, do something like '(doc = advance()) >= 0' instead
> of comparing to -1 for improved performance.
> I will post a patch shortly
--
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: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
