lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <>
Subject Re: Lucene's default settings & back compatibility
Date Tue, 19 May 2009 13:02:20 GMT
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Robert Muir <> wrote:
> in my tests the problem seemed to boil down to iteration of a sparse
> openbitset... so maybe the filter approach is still an option but when #
> docs is small some other doc id set impl is used?

Interesting... was your test a case where wicked fast queries became
only somewhat fast?  Or did you actually see slowish queries get much

In general, I'm less concerned about the former than the latter... I
think it's the wicked slow queries in Lucene that we need to focus on.

Also, LUCENE-1536 (appply filters via random access API) should
independently address this, as well as filters-as-BooleanClause.

But I'll include this in the issue; eg, I think MultiTermQuery could
choose sparse vs dense bit set impl


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message