[Zope] Re: performance of textindexng2 vs. zctextindex

2005-07-20 Thread Francis Kelly
Thanks for your response, Andreas, and thanks for writing TXNG in the 
first place. I really appreciate the contribution.



I recently installed TextIndexNG2 2.1.1
   



which is *pretty old*. Take a look at the v 2.2.0 which has been optimized 
over the time in different ways. Consider using StupidStorage as documented 
in the release notes.


 



Question re v 2.2.0:  on this page 
http://www.zope.org/Members/ajung/TextIndexNG there are three 
possibilities 2.2.0, 2.2.0b1, 2.2.0b2. The last modified column 
indicates that 2.2.0 has been modified most recently, but I'm assuming 
that the b1  b2 versions are in fact more recent. Is that true?


Also, 2.2.0b1 is around 2MB, whereas the other two are 600K and I 
noticed after downloading 2.2.0 that stemming support seems absent.


So, from all this I'm assuming that if I want stemming support I should 
grab the 2MB 2.2.0b1. Is that right?


I'll look into StupidStorage.



I've been struck that if the number of search hits is high, TextIndexNG2
is much slower than ZCTextIndex. For example, if I do a search on
'podcast' (our site deals w/ podcasting) I get about 14,000 hits.
ZCTextIndex returns the results in about 0.1 seconds; TextIndexNG2 takes
31 seconds or 300 times longer. In general, the more hits there are, the
bigger the difference between the two search indexes.
   



Query speed depends on different things: the query, the implementation, the 
operations needed to be performed during the query. Because of some 
functionality TXNG needs to store much more information than ZCTextIndex.

It did this as said above sometimes in a not so efficient way (see above).
You might also look at TextIndexNG V3.


 



V3 is appealing but we're running 2.7.6 and I'm not sure that I want the 
hassle of installing Five at this point. When we go to 2.8, which we'll 
probably due in a couple of months, V3 will be an option.


Thanks for your help,
Francis



___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


[Zope] Re: performance of textindexng2 vs. zctextindex

2005-07-20 Thread Andreas Jung



--On 20. Juli 2005 11:22:37 -0700 Francis Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Question re v 2.2.0:  on this page
http://www.zope.org/Members/ajung/TextIndexNG there are three
possibilities 2.2.0, 2.2.0b1, 2.2.0b2. The last modified column indicates
that 2.2.0 has been modified most recently, but I'm assuming that the b1
 b2 versions are in fact more recent. Is that true?


Why should beta versions be more recent than the final version? 2.2.0 is 
the latest.


Also, 2.2.0b1 is around 2MB, whereas the other two are 600K and I noticed
after downloading 2.2.0 that stemming support seems absent.


This is documented in the release notes. 2.2.0 does not support stemming 
anymore.


-aj


pgp5DGNJ6VxNo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )