lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Ganyo <>
Subject RE: Datefiltering performance issues
Date Thu, 20 Jun 2002 21:35:37 GMT
If you're basically looking for a query, try using a RangeQuery instead of a
Filter.  I think a filter is really best used if you are doing multiple
queries on a subset of your data that you can create a filter for.


P.S. This question really should have been asked on the *users* list, not
the developers list.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sylvain Puccianti []
> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 4:28 PM
> To:
> Subject: Datefiltering performance issues
> Hi. I am experiencing some performance issues with the
> Datefilter. Basically, I'm searching an index with
> around 200000 documents. I've got several threads
> sharing the same IndexReader object. A single thread
> searching and date filtering the index returns in
> about 300ms. If 5 threads are performing searches
> simultaneously, date filtering (mainly the creation of
> the bitset of documents matching the date criteria I'm
> passing) takes around 8s ! With 10 threads,
> performance drops to 30s per query !
> My investigations led me to the get(Term term) method
> of the TermInfoReader. If I'm right (which I'm not
> sure of at all...), this method is synchronized and
> each thread has to call it for each date term within
> the date bounds. So, it looks like there is some
> contention here... If I understand well, this method
> is synchronized because there is only one single
> instance of TermInfoReader per SegmentReader, so each
> thread shares the same TermEnum for date filtering.
> Does anybody have any idea on how I could make
> Datefiletering faster ?
> Any help is welcomed ! Thanks,
> Sylvain
> ___________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse gratuite et en fran├žais !
> Yahoo! Mail :
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message