Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: <354599772.1259100399725.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:06:39 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Issue Comment Edited: (LUCENE-1606) Automaton Query/Filter
 (scalable regex)
In-Reply-To: <1392250321.1239871695357.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1606?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12782198#action_12782198 ] 

Robert Muir edited comment on LUCENE-1606 at 11/24/09 10:04 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------

benchmark results from mike's idea. I don't use any heuristic, just remove the extra 'next' to show the tradeoffs.

disclaimer: against trunk with LUCENE-2075

||Pattern||Iter||AvgHits||AvgMS||AvgMS (noNext)||
|N?N?N?N|10|1000.0|37.5|28.4|
|?NNNNNN|10|10.0|6.4|6.1|
|??NNNNN|10|100.0|9.6|9.2|
|???NNNN|10|1000.0|52.7|40.9|
|????NNN|10|10000.0|300.7|262.3|
|NN??NNN|10|100.0|4.9|4.1|
|NN?N*|10|10000.0|9.6|28.9|
|?NN*|10|100000.0|80.4|235.4|
|*N|10|1000000.0|3811.6|3747.5|
|*NNNNNN|10|10.0|2098.3|2221.9|
|NNNNN??|10|100.0|2.2|2.4|

Mike my gut feeling, which will require a lot more testing, is that if the automaton accepts a finite language (in the wildcard case, no *), we should not do the next() call.
but more benchmarking is needed, with more patterns, especially on flex branch to determine if this heuristic is best.


      was (Author: rcmuir):
    benchmark results from mike's idea. I don't use any heuristic, just remove the extra 'next' to show the tradeoffs.

||Pattern||Iter||AvgHits||AvgMS||AvgMS (noNext)||
|N?N?N?N|10|1000.0|37.5|28.4|
|?NNNNNN|10|10.0|6.4|6.1|
|??NNNNN|10|100.0|9.6|9.2|
|???NNNN|10|1000.0|52.7|40.9|
|????NNN|10|10000.0|300.7|262.3|
|NN??NNN|10|100.0|4.9|4.1|
|NN?N*|10|10000.0|9.6|28.9|
|?NN*|10|100000.0|80.4|235.4|
|*N|10|1000000.0|3811.6|3747.5|
|*NNNNNN|10|10.0|2098.3|2221.9|
|NNNNN??|10|100.0|2.2|2.4|

Mike my gut feeling, which will require a lot more testing, is that if the automaton accepts a finite language (in the wildcard case, no *), we should not do the next() call.
but more benchmarking is needed, with more patterns, especially on flex branch to determine if this heuristic is best.

  
> Automaton Query/Filter (scalable regex)
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1606
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1606
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Search
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>            Assignee: Robert Muir
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.1
>
>         Attachments: automaton.patch, automatonMultiQuery.patch, automatonmultiqueryfuzzy.patch, automatonMultiQuerySmart.patch, automatonWithWildCard.patch, automatonWithWildCard2.patch, BenchWildcard.java, LUCENE-1606-flex.patch, LUCENE-1606-flex.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606.patch, LUCENE-1606_nodep.patch
>
>
> Attached is a patch for an AutomatonQuery/Filter (name can change if its not suitable).
> Whereas the out-of-box contrib RegexQuery is nice, I have some very large indexes (100M+ unique tokens) where queries are quite slow, 2 minutes, etc. Additionally all of the existing RegexQuery implementations in Lucene are really slow if there is no constant prefix. This implementation does not depend upon constant prefix, and runs the same query in 640ms.
> Some use cases I envision:
>  1. lexicography/etc on large text corpora
>  2. looking for things such as urls where the prefix is not constant (http:// or ftp://)
> The Filter uses the BRICS package (http://www.brics.dk/automaton/) to convert regular expressions into a DFA. Then, the filter "enumerates" terms in a special way, by using the underlying state machine. Here is my short description from the comments:
>      The algorithm here is pretty basic. Enumerate terms but instead of a binary accept/reject do:
>       
>      1. Look at the portion that is OK (did not enter a reject state in the DFA)
>      2. Generate the next possible String and seek to that.
> the Query simply wraps the filter with ConstantScoreQuery.
> I did not include the automaton.jar inside the patch but it can be downloaded from http://www.brics.dk/automaton/ and is BSD-licensed.

-- 
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