Thanks Adrien! On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:49 AM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You are correct, query rewriting is not affected by the use of search vs. > searchAfter. > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 3:37 PM Puneeth Bikkumanla <pbikkuma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hello, > > Sorry I should have clarified what I meant by “optimized”. I am familiar > > with the collector/comparators using the “after” doc to filter out > > documents but I specifically was talking about the query rewriting phase. > > Is the query rewritten differently in search vs searchAfter? Looking at > the > > code I think no but would just like to confirm if there are any edge > cases > > here. > > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 8:46 AM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello Puneeth, > > > > > > When you pass an `after` doc, Lucene will filter out documents that > > compare > > > better than this `after` document if it can. See e.g. what > LongComparator > > > does with its `topValue`, which is the value of the `after` doc. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 4:34 PM Puneeth Bikkumanla < > > pbikkuma...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > I was wondering if a user-defined Query is optimized the same way in > > both > > > > search/searchAfter provided the index stays the same (no CRUD takes > > > place). > > > > > > > > In searchAfter we pass in an "after" doc so I was wondering if that > > > changes > > > > how a query is optimized at all. By looking at the code, I'm thinking > > no > > > > but was wondering if there were any other parameters here that I am > not > > > > aware of that would influence query optimization differently in > > > > search/searchAfter. Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Adrien > > > > > > > > -- > Adrien >
