fast even though it matches everything - no
> scoring.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> -Original Message- From: Arjen van der Meijden
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:06 PM
>
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Performance measurements
>
> Hi Sriram,
>
fast even though it matches everything - no
scoring.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Arjen van der Meijden
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:06 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Performance measurements
Hi Sriram,
I don't see any obvious mistakes, although
Hi Sriram,
I don't see any obvious mistakes, although you don't need to create a
FilteredQuery: There are plenty of search-methods on the IndexSearcher
that accept both a query (your TermQuery) and a filter (your TermsFilter).
The way I understand Filters (but I have no advanced in-depth know
Thanks everyone. I'm trying this out:
> So searching would become:
> - Create a Query with only your termA
> - Create a TermsFilter with all your termB's
> - execute your preferred search-method with both the query and the filter
I don't the get the same results as before - and am still debuggin
On 24-7-2013 21:58 Sriram Sankar wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
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
d
be wrapped as a CSQ for search so that no scoring would be done.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Sriram Sankar
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:58 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Performance measurements
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jack Krupansky
his 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 pur
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
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
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Sriram Sankar 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
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:11 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Performance measurements
I did some performance tests on a real index using a query having the
following pattern:
termA AND (termB1 OR termB2 OR ... OR termBn)
The results were not good and I was wondering if I may
Clarification - I used an MMap'd index and warmed it up with similar
queries, as well as running the identical query many times before starting
measurements. I had ample heap space.
Sriram.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Sriram Sankar wrote:
> I did some performance tests on a real index us
I did some performance tests on a real index using a query having the
following pattern:
termA AND (termB1 OR termB2 OR ... OR termBn)
The results were not good and I was wondering if I may be doing something
wrong (and what I would need to do to improve performance), or is it just
that the OR is
13 matches
Mail list logo
