Hello Dennis, On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Dennis van der Laan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ard, > > Thanks! The performance went up by a factor x10. Still not what I hoped > for, but I'm not sure the query itself is still a problem.
so now it is 100 ms? That is not to fast still. What is your query? Furthermore, of course, index size matters as well > > A related question: could it be that when a query returns no results, > this is slower than when it does return a result? Might it have > something to do with Lucene not having an index for that particular > property value? No, an inverted index structure does not suffer from this Regards Ard > >> Hello Dennis, >>
