Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 48280 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2009 20:24:02 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Oct 2009 20:24:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 12178 invoked by uid 500); 9 Oct 2009 20:24:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 12108 invoked by uid 500); 9 Oct 2009 20:24:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 12100 invoked by uid 99); 9 Oct 2009 20:24:01 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:24:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:23:52 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C8C234C1F0 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <64954248.1255119811358.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 13:23:31 -0700 (PDT) From: "Matt Johnston (JIRA)" To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: [jira] Created: (JCR-2353) Poor performance in range queries using dates MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Poor performance in range queries using dates --------------------------------------------- Key: JCR-2353 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2353 Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository Issue Type: Improvement Components: jackrabbit-core Affects Versions: 1.6.0 Reporter: Matt Johnston I am evaluating migrating from 1.5 to 1.6. I created several test cases that prove the query performance of 1.6 is the same or better than 1.5. That is until I add a date property into my query. The repository has 400,000 nodes. Each node as several string based properties (@property, @property2, ...) and a date based property (@datestart). Every node has a relatively unique datestart and the total date range spans 6 years. In my tests, my base query is: //element(*,my:namespace)[@property='value'] order by @datestart descending The time to run this query in 1.5 and 1.6 is: 1.5 = 1.5 seconds 1.6 = 1.5 seconds If I add a date property: //element(*,my:namespace)[@property='value' and @datestart<=xs:dateTime('2009-09-24T11:53:23.293-05:00')] order by @datestart descending the results are: 1.5 = 1.5 seconds 1.6 = 3.5 seconds I have isolated the slow down to the implementation of SortedLuceneQueryHits. SortedLuceneQueryHits is not present in 1.5. I have run versions of the test where the query is run 20 times simultaneously and a different time where the query is run 20 times sequentially. In both tests I do see evidence that caching is taking place, but it provides only very minor performance gains. Also, running the 1.6 query multiple times does not decrease the query time dramatically. http://www.nabble.com/Date-Property-Performance-in-1.6-td25704607.html -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.