not. (A brief run through with a single
user suggested this, although that's not statistically significant...) So
we
decided to avoid highlighting altogether until we can do it across the
board.
Cheers,
Andrew.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-is-very
be affecting you for a simple term
query, but i'm not sure.
-Hoss
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-is-very-slow-tp26160216p26211697.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-is-very-slow-tp26160216p26267441.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
:
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-is-very-slow-tp26160217p26160217.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-is-very-slow-tp26160217p26194384.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive
: Has anyone else seen this sort of behaviour before? This is with a nightly
: from 2009-10-26.
have you tried hl.usePhraseHighlighter=false ? ...
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-performance-between-1.3-and-1.4rc-to26190790.html
...it doesn't seem like it should be affecting you for a
It should be the same speed wither way for a term query. The
highlighted is going to be slow on general for a 1mb + doc. It
processes a token at a time. The fast vector highlighter is much
faster in those cases and should be in the next release. It handles
fewer query types though.
-
://old.nabble.com/file/p26160217/solrconfig.xml solrconfig.xml
Thanks (once again),
Andrew.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Highlighting-is-very-slow-tp26160217p26160217.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
