Jackrabbit 1.6 uses Lucene 2.4.1. I think 1.5 uses Lucene 2.4.0. In Jackrabbit 1.6, some things were refactored to work better with 2.4.1. Overall, most queries do perform better. But I guess this type of query did not see the intended performance gain.
The SortedLuceneQueryHits is new in 1.6, so I cannot tell if the performance drop is caused by this new Jackrabbit code or by some code changes in Lucene 2.4.1. Ard Schrijvers-3 wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 10:38 PM, majohnst <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I've done a lot more digging and the slowdown seems to happen in the >> SortedLuceneQueryHits class. Specifically in the first two lines of the >> getHits() method. Line one creates a TopFieldDocCollector and line 2 >> searches the index with searcher.search(query, collector). > > has this code changed wrt the jackrabbit version for which is was > faster? If not, then what are the lucene versions in both cases? > >> >> Since the query is trying to find a date that is >=, does this get turned >> into a range query in lucene? Would that slow things down? > > Well, range queries are indeed slow. But, they shouldn't become slower > overnight. There are more effective ways in lucene these days, but > that is something for coming versions. > > Regards Ard > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Date-Property-Performance-in-1.6-tp25704607p25768083.html Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
