These JIRA issues contain results against two ann-benchmarks datasets. It'd
be great to get your thoughts/ feedback if you have any:
* Searching: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9937
* Indexing: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9941
The benchmarks are based on the setup he
using lucene-backward-codecs-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar makes it work :-)
Thank you very much!
But IIUC it is recommended to reindex when upgrading, right? I guess
similar to what Solr is recommending
https://solr.apache.org/guide/8_0/reindexing.html
Am 26.05.21 um 21:26 schrieb Michael Sokolov:
I
Thanks Michael. IIRC, the thing that was taking so long was merging into a
single segment. Is there already benchmarking code for HNSW
available somewhere? I feel like I remember someone posting benchmarking
results on one of the Jira tickets.
Thanks,
Alex
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 3:41 PM Michael
This java implementation will be slower than the C implementation. I
believe the algorithm is essentially the same, however this is new and
there may be bugs! I (and I think Julie had similar results IIRC)
measured something like 8x slower than hnswlib (using ann-benchmarks).
It is also surprising
I think you need backward-codecs-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT there. It enables 9.0
to read 8.x indexes.
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 9:27 AM Michael Wechner
wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I am using Lucene 8.8.2 in production and I am currently doing some
> tests using 9.0.0-SNAPSHOT, whereas I have included
> lucene-backward-
Hi Alex
Thank you very much for your feedback and the various insights!
Am 26.05.21 um 04:41 schrieb Alex K:
Hi Michael and others,
Sorry just now getting back to you. For your three original questions:
- Yes, I was referring to the Lucene90Hnsw* classes. Michael S. had a
thorough response.
-
Hi
I am using Lucene 8.8.2 in production and I am currently doing some
tests using 9.0.0-SNAPSHOT, whereas I have included
lucene-backward-codecs, because in the log files it was asking me
whether I have forgotten to include lucene-backward-codecs.jar
org.apache.lucene
