: 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
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
Any ideas on this??
Regards
Ganesh
- Original Message -
From: Ganesh emailg...@yahoo.co.in
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
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
: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 sorting is consuming nearly 500 MB. 30% records are
not part of primary result set and they don't have sort field
pointers and it is not part of initial search.
Regards
Ganesh
- Original Message -
From: Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: Sorting field contating NULL values consumes field cache memory
Right now, you can't
I am doing sorting on DateTime with minute resolution. I am having 90 million
of records and sorting is consuming nearly 500 MB. 30% records are not part of
primary result set and they don't have sort field. But field cache memory (4 *
IndexReader.maxDoc() * (# of different fields actually used
