Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 93140 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2009 22:33:53 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Oct 2009 22:33:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 90698 invoked by uid 500); 15 Oct 2009 22:33:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 90635 invoked by uid 500); 15 Oct 2009 22:33:52 -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 90626 invoked by uid 99); 15 Oct 2009 22:33:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:33:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of john.wang@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.226 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.226] (HELO mail-gx0-f226.google.com) (209.85.217.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:33:49 +0000 Received: by gxk26 with SMTP id 26so1341157gxk.11 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:33:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=z35uZ/MQalQ5LpywEh18IFfw5SKarS8lb03jBsKI6aY=; b=vGDjkDbPRJfk2hjSXvDDLkDPDWpVb8s+ICkgTdsYr4LZAGCBc5gMaatJOlM7lcRA3Y p2OVAQNNIl3fbckA7fZrpZEkTbTQaMRdXyAAw2kBdbBzuQfS+m3qSKxomaALPbD3JRaP kokoB+DTHb0cLSAXqkH7TCu7oVu3OjqioeM9Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=fgVjU1+NVY6JgXJ9ucQ8IJRB9sCpt2Ozl1bd2ef5XHLuOXIH20WhCMEXqCMm30vHGG cCytp3fNtF9fCxaK5MXG8Ernr3j3z2gPTDSEuHiO/gIzyX5my5RIL4iA9kGG3W4utCzo XEnGwEyzQwiIhTrULE7QFny9W0nujLnAPDaOA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.166.10 with SMTP id t10mr990710ano.143.1255646008298; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:33:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8837fb770910151529o6b7a27ebof9dfd3f82a0e88ad@mail.gmail.com> References: <8837fb770910142012w5f11ba57y99aeb18493603813@mail.gmail.com> <4b124c310910150131w6bea9e07ne4ab07d00faa0e2e@mail.gmail.com> <9ac0c6aa0910150312r1492cc23i7a0e770919613780@mail.gmail.com> <4b124c310910151252p2ee8f51ah33e4285dfa05dac2@mail.gmail.com> <9ac0c6aa0910151433k70df1a2cy1a67549a3e8d5def@mail.gmail.com> <8837fb770910151529o6b7a27ebof9dfd3f82a0e88ad@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:33:28 -0700 Message-ID: <8837fb770910151533n7c3239b6k4668832c010e01c2@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: lucene 2.9 sorting algorithm From: John Wang To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org, yonik@lucidimagination.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5bb3d49cf39047600de19 --001636c5bb3d49cf39047600de19 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 BTW, we are have a little sandbox for these experiments. And all my testcode are at. They are not very polished. https://lucene-book.googlecode.com/svn/trunk -John On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:29 PM, John Wang wrote: > Numbers Mike requested for Int types: > > only the time/cputime are posted, others are all the same since the > algorithm is the same. > > Lucene 2.9: > numhits: 10 > time: 14619495 > cpu: 146126 > > numhits: 20 > time: 14550568 > cpu: 163242 > > numhits: 100 > time: 16467647 > cpu: 178379 > > > my test: > numHits: 10 > time: 14101094 > cpu: 144715 > > numHits: 20 > time: 14804821 > cpu: 151305 > > numHits: 100 > time: 15372157 > cpu time: 158842 > > Conclusions: > The are very similar, the differences are all within error bounds, > especially with lower PQ sizes, which second sort alg again slightly faster. > > Hope this helps. > > -John > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Michael McCandless >> wrote: >> > Though it'd be odd if the switch to searching by segment >> > really was most of the gains here. >> >> I had assumed that much of the improvement was due to ditching >> MultiTermEnum/MultiTermDocs. >> Note that LUCENE-1483 was before LUCENE-1596... but that only helps >> with queries that use a TermEnum (range, prefix, etc). >> >> -Yonik >> http://www.lucidimagination.com >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org >> >> > --001636c5bb3d49cf39047600de19 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BTW, we are have a little sandbox for these experiments. And all my testcod= e are at. They are not very polished.

https://lucene-book.googlecode.com/svn/trunk=

-John

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:29 PM= , John Wang <jo= hn.wang@gmail.com> wrote:
Numbers Mike requested for Int types:

only the time/cputime are post= ed, others are all the same since the algorithm is the same.

Lucene = 2.9:
numhits: 10
time: 14619495
cpu: 146126

numhits: 20
time: 14550568
cpu: 163242

numhits: 100
time: 16467647
cpu:= 178379


my test:
numHits: 10
time: 14101094
cpu: 144715=

numHits: 20
time: 14804821
cpu: 151305

numHits: 100 time: 15372157
cpu time: 158842

Conclusions:
The are very simi= lar, the differences are all within error bounds, especially with lower PQ = sizes, which second sort alg again slightly faster.

Hope this helps.=

-John



On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Yonik Seeley <yoni= k@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Michael McCandless
<lucene@m= ikemccandless.com> wrote:
> Though it'd be odd if the switch to searching by segment
> really was most of the gains here.

I had assumed that much of the improvement was due to ditching
MultiTermEnum/MultiTermDocs.
Note that LUCENE-1483 was before LUCENE-1596... but that only helps
with queries that use a TermEnum (range, prefix, etc).
------------------------------------------------= ---------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org



--001636c5bb3d49cf39047600de19--