lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Rutherglen <jason.rutherg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Move deletes to a top level boolean AND NOT query
Date Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:18:34 GMT
Does the LUCENE-1536 patch create a compound filter out of multiple
filters?  Then the compound filter is passed down to TermQuery?  What is the
status of LUCENE-1345?

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Michael McCandless <
lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

>
> I don't think anyone is working on it..., because It looks like this is a
> real hit to performance (the results I posted on LUCENE-1476).  We shouldn't
> do it.
>
> And, in fact, we should consider doing the reverse: taking filters that are
> now applied via iteration and instead distributing them down to each
> TermQuery (LUCENE-1536) via random-access API (if the filter can support
> it); that can give much better performance.
>
> However I need to redo these tests once LUCENE-1345 is in.
>
> Mike
>
> Jason Rutherglen wrote:
>
>  Is anyone working on this?  I can't find a patch.  I'll start one unless
>> someone has something to post.
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
View raw message