you said, if an Index is optimized, isDeleted() does not present performance
problem? I think there is still check for null in synchronized method, can jvm
optimize this, I doubt it?
----- Original Message ----
From: German Kondolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, 11 March, 2008 3:59:38 PM
Subject: Re: Searching for null (empty) fields, how to use -field:[* TO *]
Yes, my index is a "full-snapshot" created every "n" hours, there are
no incremental updates, so I decided to make another MatchAllDocsQuery
taking advantage that my index is read-only and basically removing
this checks.
Regards
Ger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:41 AM, German Kondolf
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > *:* is parsed as a MatchAllDocsQuery?
> >
> > I've got some preformance issues in Lucene 2.2 because
> > MatchAllDocsQuery ask for a "isDeleted()" for every document, I didn't
> > tried it in 2.3.
>
> That will still be the case in 2.3 (and it's a synchronized call... ouch).
> That's one of the reasons why read-only IndexReaders would be a good idea.
>
> -Yonik
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
The World's Favourite Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
