lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler" <>
Subject RE: TrieRange
Date Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:26:09 GMT
Hi Yonik,

> > An optimization might be to remove
> > the lower 0 bits from the string, but it would not be needed. The
> strings
> > are unique for one precision (no difference between 0-bits there or
> not).
> Yes, one would certainly want to remove trailing bits that were
> insignificant.
> To optimize index space, one would want to "right justify" the encoded
> number for any bit range to minimize variation on the left - this
> plays into lucene's prefix compression.

I am not sure, if this is the right way. Lucene's prefix compression is also
good for seeking fast to the term. If thousands of terms, only varying in
the last bits (because all bits before are zero), must be scanned to get to
the right one, it would get less performant. I would pack all bits to the
begiing to optimize the prefix usage. Maybe the index gets bigger, but
trierangefilter needs fast seeking to the right terms.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message