ok i see.
I tried the same test with randomized values on the numeric DV and now the
search speed is low and constant.
It's not gonna solve our issue since the values are relatively ordered in
our case but it's good to know.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Nicolas Guyot wrote:
> I have written a quick test to reproduce the slower sorting with numeric DV.
> In this test case, it happens only when reverse sorting.
Right - I bet your numeric field is relatively ordered in the index.
When this happens, there is always o
thanks Adrien for the explanation, it's really much appreciated.
I have written a quick test to reproduce the slower sorting with numeric
DV. In this test case, it happens only when reverse sorting.
About the sorting by page i mentioned, it was due to a mistake in our
testcase, sorry about that.
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Nicolas Guyot wrote:
> When sorting numerically, the search seems to take a bit of a while
> compared to the lexically sorted search.
> Also when sorting numerically the result is sorted within each page but no
> globally as opposed to the lexical sorted searc
Hi,
we are using some of the latest features of lucene for sorting which are
very cool but we are facing some issues with the numerical sort:
We need two kinds of sort: numerical and lexical.
For the lexical we are using SortedDocValuesField and for the numerical we
use NumericDocValuesField.
The
