Unicorn sounds like it was optimized for graph search. Specialized search
engines can in fact beat out generalized search engines for specific use
cases.
Scoring has been a major focus of Lucene. Non-scored filters are also
available, but the query parsers are focused (exclusively) on scored-search.
As Adrien indicates, try using raw Lucene filters and you should get much
better results. Whether even that will compete with a use-case-specific
(graph) search engine remains to be seen.
-- Jack Krupansky
-----Original Message-----
From: Sriram Sankar
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 1:03 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Performance measurements
No I do not need scoring. This is a pure retrieval query - which matches
what we used to do with Unicorn in Facebook - something like:
(name:sriram AND (friend:1 OR friend:2 ...))
This automatically gives us second degree.
With Unicorn, we would always get sub-millisecond performance even for
n>500.
Should I assume that Lucene is that much worse - or is it that this use
case has not been optimized?
Sriram.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Sriram Sankar <san...@gmail.com> wrote:
> termA AND (termB1 OR termB2 OR ... OR termBn)
Maybe this comment is not appropriate for your use-case, but if you
don't actually need scoring from the disjunction on the right of the
query, a TermsFilter will be faster when n gets large.
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
