Mailing-List: contact lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Lucene Developers List" <lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Date: 13 Apr 2004 06:10:03 -0000
Message-ID: <20040413061003.25384.qmail@nagoya.betaversion.org>
From: bugzilla@apache.org
To: lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Cc: 
Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27868]  -
    Bad performance in PrefixQuery for large indices.

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27868>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27868

Bad performance in PrefixQuery for large indices.


------- Additional Comments From jorgen@polopoly.com  2004-04-13 06:10 -------
No, I was able to rewrite the query in my application to a TermQuery instead. I
didn't want to patch my customer's lucene jar.

Suggestion 2 above will certainly improve performance if implemented. I would
almost concider it a bug that it works the way it does. Especially when
BooleanQuery has a maximum number of queries that can be added to it and throws
an exception when adding more. All of a sudden when the index gets large enough,
the application stops working properly.

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