For the future reference of anyone looking for help on this topic, this thread
http://www.nabble.com/Phrase-Query-Performance-Question-td13422183.html
discusses a phrase performance problem raised by Haishan Chen in
October 2007. If you find this thread helpful you should probably
consult that
Just for fun, I ran my cpu profiler against Solr while running a
little app to hammer Solr with phrase queries. As Mike and Yonik could
have predicted, I found that Solr was spending basically all its time
in lucene.index.MultiSegmentReader$MultiTermPositions code (called
from
On 7/12/08 7:00 PM, Chris Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike, your idea of indexing bigrams is also interesting. Do you know
if any text search platforms do this behind the scenes as their
default way of handling phrase queries?
Infoseek indexed biwords with their Ultra engine, which lives
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Chris Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I gather that phrase queries are inherently slower than non-phrase
queries, but 1-3 orders of magnitude difference seems noteworthy.
Phrase queries could be a couple times slower, but normally not to the
degree you show
On 3-Jul-08, at 3:04 PM, Chris Harris wrote:
Now I gather that phrase queries are inherently slower than non-phrase
queries, but 1-3 orders of magnitude difference seems noteworthy.
This is on Solr r654965, which I don't think is *too* far behind the
trunk version. 1200Mb RAM allocated to
Ok, I only have one segment right now, so I've got one of each of these:
.tis file: 730MB
.frq files: 9KB
.prx file: 26KB
If I'm understanding you (and Mike) properly, then even though it's
the prx file that contains the actual position info, you can't get to
that info quickly unless the tis
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Chris Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I only have one segment right now, so I've got one of each of these:
.tis file: 730MB
.frq files: 9KB
.prx file: 26KB
That's pretty much impossible (way too small). Double check those numbers.
If I'm understanding
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Chris Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I only have one segment right now, so I've got one of each of these:
.tis file: 730MB
.frq files: 9KB
.prx file: 26KB
That's pretty much
On 3-Jul-08, at 5:13 PM, Chris Harris wrote:
That's pretty much impossible (way too small). Double check those
numbers.
I don't know where I got the above numbers. Sorry. Here are the real
numbers:
.tis file: 730MB
.frq files: 10.1 GB
.prx file: 43.2 GB
Now keeping all *that* in RAM,
