Hello, How many matches do you have in both cases? I see there's a second sorting expression, it might not comply with the requirements. I'd rather start from the simple single query parser, just for the experiments. Note: I never tried it myself.
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 6:20 PM rajani m <rajinima...@gmail.com> wrote: > I ran performance tests with different query sets and the results look no > good, it is adding to the latency around ~15% instead of reducing or even > matching. Not sure if I am missing something in the config or it is an > issue. > > Here is an example query *without* WAND query parameter > select?&fl=id,ext_id&start=0&q.op=OR&sort=score desc,ext_id > asc&rows=10&q=white flowers card&defType=edismax&qf=keywords description > title > vs > *With* WAND query parameter > select?&fl=id,ext_id&start=0&q.op=OR&sort=score desc,ext_id > asc&rows=10&q=white flowers card&defType=edismax&qf=keywords description > title*&minExactCount=10* > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 8:36 AM rajani m <rajinima...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Ishan, > > I have looked into that doc, and it looks like the solr version has to > > be >8.8 and the config needed is to add the query parameter > "&minExactCount=k" > > where k is 10 or 100 depending on the accuracy of the first k docs. > > > > I ran a query performance test using an internal tool, with k set to 10 > > and 100, which barely showed any difference in query time latency, I > > didn't expect that so I was wondering if there is any configuration I > > missed. > > > > I will run a couple more tests with different query sets meanwhile and > dig > > further into implementation of the feature to see if I am missing any > > config here. Appreciate any suggestions. > > > > Thanks, > > Rajani > > > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 12:53 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < > > ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Is it possible to benchmark the query performance across a larger set of > >> queries? You can leverage Solr Bench, if needed. > >> https://github.com/fullstorydev/solr-bench > >> > >> On Thu, 1 Feb, 2024, 11:20 am Ishan Chattopadhyaya, < > >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Some documentation is here > >> > > >> > https://solr.apache.org/guide/8_6/common-query-parameters.html#minexactcount-parameter > >> > > >> > On Thu, 1 Feb, 2024, 9:53 am rajani m, <rajinima...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi All, > >> >> > >> >> To leverage the query time improvements that come with the Block > MAX > >> >> WAND > >> >> feature, what are the required configurations? > >> >> > >> >> I am on solr 9.1.1 version. As per docs, including > "minExactCount=100" > >> >> query param should do it, however I don't see any drop in query time, > >> it > >> >> is > >> >> more or less the same. Am I missing something? > >> >> > >> >> The queries I tested with are standard ones with edismax as query > >> parser > >> >> and query text is converted into boolean clauses and query has 2 > boost > >> >> params by date and popularity field. I included the "minExactCount" > >> set to > >> >> as low as 10 and 100 and increased to 1000 but didn't see key change > in > >> >> query time, it was about the same. > >> >> > >> >> Would including boost or use of edismax parser not benefit with > block > >> MAX > >> >> WAND? Example query /select?q=((white) AND (roses OR > >> >> jasmine))&defType=edismax&qf=keywords description > >> >> title&pf2=title&bf=recip(ms(NOW,datefield),3.16e-11,1,1)^2.0 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Thank you, > >> >> Rajani > >> >> > >> > > >> > > > -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev
