lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <cutt...@lucene.com>
Subject Re: MultiSearcher discards interim results
Date Tue, 11 Feb 2003 20:39:52 GMT
Ype Kingma wrote:
>>I'm confused.  The contract of this method is to return the top-scoring
>>nDocs.  For a multi-searcher it must compute the top-scoring nDocs from
>>each sub-searcher, then find the top-scoring nDocs among these.  If you
> 
> For the first sub-searcher: yes. For the remaining sub-searchers it is only
> necessary to collect docs with a score not smaller than the minimum
> score provided by the first subsearcher.

Okay, now I see what you're after.  You wish to minimize the cost of 
maintaining the queue of top-scoring documents.  But does hit queue 
maintenance ever significantly affect overall search performance?  I'd 
be very surprised if it does.  So, while perhaps not optimal, I suspect 
the current implementation is adequate.

Also, the current approach works well with RemoteSearchable, while I 
suspect your optimized version would not.  And if someone were ever to 
implement a parallel (distributed or not) version of MultiSearcher, then 
your optimization would be difficult to implement.

In summary, please tell me of a use case where this optimization 
substantially improves overall performance.

Doug


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


Mime
View raw message