Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 63660 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2006 08:29:47 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Jun 2006 08:29:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 87919 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jun 2006 08:29:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 87870 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jun 2006 08:29:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 87857 invoked by uid 99); 14 Jun 2006 08:29:43 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:29:43 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [81.228.8.83] (HELO pne-smtpout1-sn2.hy.skanova.net) (81.228.8.83) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:29:42 -0700 Received: from [192.168.0.102] (83.249.41.244) by pne-smtpout1-sn2.hy.skanova.net (7.2.072.1) id 448977B3001018DD for java-dev@lucene.apache.org; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:29:19 +0200 Subject: Re: [jira] Updated: (LUCENE-550) InstanciatedIndex - faster but memory consuming index From: karl wettin To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org In-Reply-To: <1695582.1150270590751.JavaMail.jira@brutus> References: <1695582.1150270590751.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: snigel heavy industries Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:29:10 +0200 Message-Id: <1150273751.25631.39.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 07:36 +0000, Karl Wettin (JIRA) wrote: > > > If eveything works as it should (I think so) then I'm happy to report > that a FuzzyQuery seems to be about 1500 (one thousand five hundred) > times faster on this memory implementation than on a RAMDirectory. The > speed is gained by not creating a new instance of each Term in a > TermEnum. People with an insight might want to look in to reusing the same instance of Term in SegmentTermEnum, if even possible. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org