On 8-Apr-09, at 11:13 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
I was thinking about doing this as part of LUCENE-1195. However, I
doubt that the net win will be very noticeable here. A common
scenario is that you have an index with one big body field that has
a lot of unique terms, plus several metafield
OK I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1592.
Mike
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:36 AM, Michael McCandless
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>
>> I think, we should do what was suggested in this thread: Remove it or
>> deprecate it, if it is nowhere used
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> I think, we should do what was suggested in this thread: Remove it or
> deprecate it, if it is nowhere used internally to prevent people (like me in
> the past) to try to use it.
>
> Maybe put an additional warning in the JavaDocs in addition
> > Yes, if skipTo would work more performant, I could easily use it in
> > TrieRange and would be happy as noted before. Currently, a new TermEnum
> is
> > created on each sub-range. When TrieRange was committed and therefore
> > updated, for me it was (and still is) not clear, why skipTo may not
On 4/8/09 2:08 PM, Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 00:14, Michael McCandless
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
Currently, when we're seeking a given Term, it does a binary search
across all term space, including terms belonging to other fi
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 02:01, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>> >> Also, on the other topic - how hard is it to boost
>> >> TermEnum.skipTo(term) speed to IndexReader.terms(term) level? Would be
>> >> nice for TrieRangeFilter and probably some other filters.
>> > I think all that's needed is to implement Se
> >> Also, on the other topic - how hard is it to boost
> >> TermEnum.skipTo(term) speed to IndexReader.terms(term) level? Would be
> >> nice for TrieRangeFilter and probably some other filters.
> > I think all that's needed is to implement SegmentTermEnum.skipTo,
> > calling something like tis.ter
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 00:14, Michael McCandless
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
>
>> Currently, when we're seeking a given Term, it does a binary search
>> across all term space, including terms belonging to other fields.
>> I propose augmenting fields file with t
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
> Currently, when we're seeking a given Term, it does a binary search
> across all term space, including terms belonging to other fields.
> I propose augmenting fields file with two pointers (firstTerm,
> lastTerm) for each field. That reduce
Currently, when we're seeking a given Term, it does a binary search
across all term space, including terms belonging to other fields.
I propose augmenting fields file with two pointers (firstTerm,
lastTerm) for each field. That reduces range we need to search, and
instead of comparing Terms we only
10 matches
Mail list logo
