FWIW, I had implemented a sort-by-payload feature which performs quite well.
It has a very small memory footprint (actually close to 0), and reads values
from a payload. Payloads, at least from my experience, perform better than
stored fields.
On a comparison I've once made, the sort-by-payload fe
: Right now, you can't really do anything about it. In the future, with the
: new FieldCache API that may go in, you could plug in a custom implementation
: that makes tradeoffs for a sparse array of some kind. The docid is currently
: the index into the array, but with a custom impl you may be ab
pointers and it is not part of initial search.
Regards
Ganesh
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Miller"
To:
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: Sorting field contating NULL values consumes field cache memory
> Right now, you can't really do anything about
Right now, you can't really do anything about it. In the future, with the
new FieldCache API that may go in, you could plug in a custom implementation
that makes tradeoffs for a sparse array of some kind. The docid is currently
the index into the array, but with a custom impl you may be able to use
Any ideas on this??
Regards
Ganesh
- Original Message -
From: "Ganesh"
To:
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 2:42 PM
Subject: Sorting field contating NULL values consumes field cache memory
I am doing sorting on DateTime with minute resolution. I am having 90 million
of records and sortin
