On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jack Krupansky <j...@basetechnology.com>wrote:
> Unicorn sounds like it was optimized for graph search. Specialized search > engines can in fact beat out generalized search engines for specific use > cases. > Yes and no (I worked on it). Yes, there are many aspect of Unicorn that have been optimized for graph search. But the tests I am running have very little to do with those optimizations. I am still learning about Lucene and have suspected that the scoring framework (that has to be very general) may be contributing to the performance issues. With Unicorn, we made a decision to do all scoring after retrieval and not during retrieval. > > Scoring has been a major focus of Lucene. Non-scored filters are also > available, but the query parsers are focused (exclusively) on scored-search. > When you say "filter" do you mean a step performed after retrieval? Or is it yet another retrieval operation? > > 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. Thanks (I will study this more). Sriram. > > > -- 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-unsubscribe@lucene.**apache.org<java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> java-user-help@lucene.apache.**org<java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org> >> >> >> > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.**apache.org<java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: > java-user-help@lucene.apache.**org<java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org> > >
