> In part of queries we see strange behavior where q performs 5-10x better
> than fq. The question is why?
Are you sure that the query result cache is disabled ?
2015-06-24 13:28 GMT+02:00 Esther Goldbraich <estherg...@il.ibm.com>:
> Hi,
>
> We are comparing the performance of fq versus q for queries that are
> actually filters and should not be cached.
> In part of queries we see strange behavior where q performs 5-10x better
> than fq. The question is why?
>
> An example1:
> q=maildate:{DATE1 to DATE2} COMPARED TO fq={!cache=false}maildate:{DATE1
> to DATE2}
> sort=maildate_sort* desc
> rows=50
> start=0
> group=true
> group.query=some query (without dates)
> group.query=*:*
> group.sort=maildate_sort desc
> additional fqs
>
> Schema:
> <field name="maildate" stored="true" indexed="true" type="tdate"/>
> <field name="maildate_sort" stored="false" indexed="false" type="tdate"
> docValues="true"/>
>
> Thank you,
> Esther
> -------------------------------------------------
> Esther Goldbraich
> Social Technologies & Analytics - IBM Haifa Research Lab
> Phone: +972-4-8281059
