Re: query syntax performance difference?
On 10/11/07, BrendanD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a difference in the performance for the following 2 variations on query syntax? The first query was a response from Solr by using a single fq parameter in the URL. The second query was a response from Solr by using separate fq parameter in the URL, one for each field. str name=fq product_is_active:true AND product_status_code:complete AND category_id:1001570 AND attribute_id_value_en_pair:1005758\:Elvis Presley /str vs: arr name=fq strproduct_is_active:true/str strproduct_status_code:complete/str strcategory_id:1001570/str strattribute_id_value_en_pair:1005758\:Elvis Presley/str /arr I'm just wondering if the queries get executed differently and whether it's better to split out each individual query into it's own statement or combine them using the AND operator. If they almost always appear together, then use an AND and put them in the same filter. If they are relatively independent, use different filters. Having solr intersect a few filters is normally very fast, so independent filters is usually fine. -Yonik
query syntax performance difference?
Hi, Is there a difference in the performance for the following 2 variations on query syntax? The first query was a response from Solr by using a single fq parameter in the URL. The second query was a response from Solr by using separate fq parameter in the URL, one for each field. str name=fq product_is_active:true AND product_status_code:complete AND category_id:1001570 AND attribute_id_value_en_pair:1005758\:Elvis Presley /str vs: arr name=fq strproduct_is_active:true/str strproduct_status_code:complete/str strcategory_id:1001570/str strattribute_id_value_en_pair:1005758\:Elvis Presley/str /arr I'm just wondering if the queries get executed differently and whether it's better to split out each individual query into it's own statement or combine them using the AND operator. I've tested them against our production server, but I didn't want to clear the cache and compare the results. They've already been cached, so they come back fairly quickly (within 1ms). Although originally the first query came back in 660 ms. The second query had already been cached. Thanks, Brendan -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/query-syntax-performance-difference--tf4610975.html#a13167830 Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
