[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12731315#action_12731315
 ] 

Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1693:
---------------------------------------

{quote}
There is one case, when it also affects you (during indexing). If you have an 
old-style tokenfilter that calls next() on the next stream that is new-api, it 
would clone. In my opinion, the speed is about the same like before:
{quote}

Yes this is exactly what I mean. Not sure if cloning in this case is slower 
than creating a new empty instance; if yes, it's probably not significant.

{quote}
As far as I see (not yet tried out), you try to test new-style-API streams with 
the old Tee/Sink tokenizer, that is deprecated. You were not able to do this 
before 2.9 (no new API) and so the bw problem is not there. If you rewrite your 
streams with new API, you should use TeeSinkTokenizer, too.
{quote}

You are right - it fails because it uses a new attribute that will not be 
cached in the Tee/Sink. So I agree that this is not a valid test if we say that 
Tee/Sink only supports the old API. I will remove the cases that are invalid.

Thinking out loud here again: What if a user uses Lucene in combination with a 
third-party jar containing TokenStreams, and also own implementations. Are 
there use cases where it would be necessary for us to provide a switch to run 
in only-old-API mode?

> AttributeSource/TokenStream API improvements
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1693
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Analysis
>            Reporter: Michael Busch
>            Assignee: Michael Busch
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, 
> LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, 
> LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, lucene-1693.patch, 
> TestAPIBackwardsCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java, 
> TestCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java
>
>
> This patch makes the following improvements to AttributeSource and
> TokenStream/Filter:
> - removes the set/getUseNewAPI() methods (including the standard
>   ones). Instead by default incrementToken() throws a subclass of
>   UnsupportedOperationException. The indexer tries to call
>   incrementToken() initially once to see if the exception is thrown;
>   if so, it falls back to the old API.
> - introduces interfaces for all Attributes. The corresponding
>   implementations have the postfix 'Impl', e.g. TermAttribute and
>   TermAttributeImpl. AttributeSource now has a factory for creating
>   the Attribute instances; the default implementation looks for
>   implementing classes with the postfix 'Impl'. Token now implements
>   all 6 TokenAttribute interfaces.
> - new method added to AttributeSource:
>   addAttributeImpl(AttributeImpl). Using reflection it walks up in the
>   class hierarchy of the passed in object and finds all interfaces
>   that the class or superclasses implement and that extend the
>   Attribute interface. It then adds the interface->instance mappings
>   to the attribute map for each of the found interfaces.
> - AttributeImpl now has a default implementation of toString that uses
>   reflection to print out the values of the attributes in a default
>   formatting. This makes it a bit easier to implement AttributeImpl,
>   because toString() was declared abstract before.
> - Cloning is now done much more efficiently in
>   captureState. The method figures out which unique AttributeImpl
>   instances are contained as values in the attributes map, because
>   those are the ones that need to be cloned. It creates a single
>   linked list that supports deep cloning (in the inner class
>   AttributeSource.State). AttributeSource keeps track of when this
>   state changes, i.e. whenever new attributes are added to the
>   AttributeSource. Only in that case will captureState recompute the
>   state, otherwise it will simply clone the precomputed state and
>   return the clone. restoreState(AttributeSource.State) walks the
>   linked list and uses the copyTo() method of AttributeImpl to copy
>   all values over into the attribute that the source stream
>   (e.g. SinkTokenizer) uses. 
> The cloning performance can be greatly improved if not multiple
> AttributeImpl instances are used in one TokenStream. A user can
> e.g. simply add a Token instance to the stream instead of the individual
> attributes. Or the user could implement a subclass of AttributeImpl that
> implements exactly the Attribute interfaces needed. I think this
> should be considered an expert API (addAttributeImpl), as this manual
> optimization is only needed if cloning performance is crucial. I ran
> some quick performance tests using Tee/Sink tokenizers (which do
> cloning) and the performance was roughly 20% faster with the new
> API. I'll run some more performance tests and post more numbers then.
> Note also that when we add serialization to the Attributes, e.g. for
> supporting storing serialized TokenStreams in the index, then the
> serialization should benefit even significantly more from the new API
> than cloning. 
> Also, the TokenStream API does not change, except for the removal 
> of the set/getUseNewAPI methods. So the patches in LUCENE-1460
> should still work.
> All core tests pass, however, I need to update all the documentation
> and also add some unit tests for the new AttributeSource
> functionality. So this patch is not ready to commit yet, but I wanted
> to post it already for some feedback. 

-- 
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

Reply via email to