On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Carsten Schnober <schno...@ids-mannheim.de> wrote: > Am 11.03.2013 13:38, schrieb Michael McCandless: >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >> >>> Set the rewrite method to e.g. SCORING_BOOLEAN_QUERY_REWRITE, then this >>> should work (after rewrite your query is a BooleanQuery, which supports >>> extractTerms()). >> >> ... as long as you don't exceed the max number of terms allowed by BQ >> (1024 by default, but you can raise it). > > True, I've noticed this meanwhile. Are there any recommendations for > this setting where the limit is as large as possible while staying > within a reasonable performance? Of course, this is highly subjective, > but what's the magnitude here? Will a limit of 1,024,000 typically > increase the query time by the factor 1,000 too? > Carsten
I think 1024 may already be too high ;) But really it depends on your situation: test different limits and see. How much slower a larger query is depends on the specifics of the terms ... Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
