Thanks Yonik. In my case, there is only one "title" field per document so is
there a way to force Solr to work the old way? My analyser doesn't break up
the "title" field into multiple tokens. It only tries to format the field
value (to lower case, remove unwanted chars and words). Therefore, it's no
difference from using "string" single-valued type.

I'll try your first recommendation to see how it goes.

Thanks again.

On 7/17/07, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Since you went from a non multi-valued "string" type (which Solr knows
has at most one value per document) to a custom analyzer type (which
could produce multiple tokens per document), Solr switched tactics
from using the FieldCache for faceting to using the filterCache.

Right now, you could try to
1) use facet.enum.cache.minDf=1000 (don't use the fieldCache except
for large facets)
2) expand the size of the fieldcache to 1000000 if you have the memory

Optimizing your index should also speed up faceting (but that is a lot
of facets).

-Yonik

On 7/16/07, climbingrose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> My facet browsing performance has been decent on my system until I add
my
> custom Analyser. Initially, I facetted "title" field which is of default
> string type (no analysers, tokenisers...) and got quick responses (first
> query is just under 1s, subsequent queries are < 0.1s). I created a
custom
> analyser which is not much different from the DefaultAnalyzer in
FieldType
> class. Essentially, this analyzer will not do any tokonisations, but
only
> convert the value into lower case, remove spaces, unwanted chars and
words.
> After I applied the analyser to "title" field, facet performance
degraded
> considerably. Every query is now > 1.2s and the filterCache hit ratio is
> extremely small:
>
> lookups : 918485
> > hits : 23
> > hitratio : 0.00
> > inserts : 918487
> > evictions : 917971
> > size : 512
> > cumulative_lookups : 918485
> > cumulative_hits : 23
> > cumulative_hitratio : 0.00
> > cumulative_inserts : 918487
> > cumulative_evictions : 917971




--
Regards,

Cuong Hoang

Reply via email to