>>> Have you tested to see if the zebra engine does handle the stopwords >>> correctly? I didn't know that it did that. >> No I haven't tested and I don't know also if Zebra supports stop words. > > I found the first part of your sentence troubling, but perhaps I worry > too much. :)
I haven't tested Zebra stopwords support for good reason: it seems not to exist. I have tested my patch :) Does it alleviate ambiguity? > A good case can be made that stopwords are (or could be) irrelevant > when Zebra is used, but surely they are needed for NoZebra to perform > reasonably well. I agree. So something like: return unless NoZebra... > At this point, patches to improve performance should not change > functionality, and ideally a test case should accompany each major > performance fix to verify that functional behavior has not in fact > changed. Perhaps you could take another look at _remove_stopwords() to > see if a faster implementation can be written. The point of this patch is to underline and prove that _remove_stopwords function take 1/3 of total response time for a search request. At the beginning of my quest (sic), there is the observation that opac search response time was not so good (4 s). I was able to do some performance testing, but I'm not necessarily the more qualified to touch a function like this one. Will give a try whatever. Thanks. -- Frédéric _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel
