Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 62179 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2009 18:16:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Oct 2009 18:16:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 56761 invoked by uid 500); 29 Oct 2009 18:16:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 56704 invoked by uid 500); 29 Oct 2009 18:16:23 -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 56696 invoked by uid 99); 29 Oct 2009 18:16:23 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:16:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-10.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:16:19 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66721234C046 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1962384126.1256840159418.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:15:59 +0000 (UTC) From: "Mark Miller (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Created: (LUCENE-2018) Reconsider boolean max clause exception MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 Reconsider boolean max clause exception --------------------------------------- Key: LUCENE-2018 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2018 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Improvement Reporter: Mark Miller Now that we have smarter multi-term queries, I think its time to reconsider the boolean max clause setting. It made more sense before, because you could hit it more unaware when the multi-term queries got huge - now its more likely that if it happens it because a user built the boolean themselves. And no duh thousands more boolean queries means slower perf and more resources needed. When don't throw an exception when you try in use a ton of resources in a thousand other ways. The current setting also suffers from the static hell argument - especially when you consider something like Solr's multicore feature - you can have different settings for this in different cores, and the last one is going to win. Its ugly. Yes, that could be addressed better in Solr as well - but I still think it should be less ugly in Lucene as well. I'd like to consider either doing away with it, or raising it by quite a bit at the least. Or an alternative better solution. Right now, it aint so great. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org