lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adrien Grand (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Resolved] (LUCENE-6032) Dealing with slow iterators
Date Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:15:12 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6032?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Adrien Grand resolved LUCENE-6032.
----------------------------------
    Resolution: Fixed

LUCENE-6198 provides a better alternative. 

> Dealing with slow iterators
> ---------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-6032
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6032
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Wish
>            Reporter: Adrien Grand
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: LUCENE-6032.patch
>
>
> This is a recurring issue (for instance already discussed in LUCENE-5418) but queries
can sometimes be super slow if they wrap a filter that provides linear-time nextDoc/advance.
> LUCENE-5418 has the following comment:
> bq. New patch, throwing UOE from DocIdSet.iterator() for the Filter returned by Range.getFilter().
I like this approach: it's safer for the user so they don't accidentally apply a super slow
filter.
> I like this approach because doc id sets not providing efficient iteration should really
be an exception rather than a common case. In addition, using an exception has the benefit
of propagating the information through the call stack, which would not be the case if we used
null or a sentinel value to say that the iterator is super slow. So if you write a filter
that can wrap other filters and doesn't know how to deal with filters that don't support efficient
iteration, you do not need to modify your code: it will work just fine with filters that support
fast iteration and will fail on filters that don't.
> Something I would like to explore is whether things like FilteredQuery could catch this
exception in order to fall back automatically to a random-access strategy?
> The general idea I have is that it is ok to apply a random filter as long as you have
a fast iterator to drive iteration? So eg. a filtered query based on a slow iterator would
make sense, but not a ConstantScoreQuery that would wrap a filter since it would need to evaluate
the filter on all non-deleted documents (it would propagate the exception of the filter).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message