lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Renaud Delbru (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1410) PFOR implementation
Date Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:23:28 GMT


Renaud Delbru commented on LUCENE-1410:

When performing some tests on PFOR, I have noticed that your algorithm was favoring very small
numFrameBits for a very large number of exceptions. For example, on block of size 512, I have
noticed that many of the blocks was with bestFrameBits = 1, and the number of exceptions reaching
> 450.

I found that this was due to the seeting of the allowedNumExceptions variable (in the last
part of the PFOR#frameBitsForCompression() method) which was set to the number of current
exceptions + the maximum allowed (which at the end is generally extremely large).Is it a bug,
or is it something I don't understand in the current PFOR algorithm ?

P.S.: btw, the previous benchmark results I have posted are wrong due to a bug which was due
to the hardcoded byte buffer size (1024) in PForIndexInput/Output. I'll post soon updated
results, with a comparison with GroupVarInt (from WSDM09 - Jeff Dean talk).

> PFOR implementation
> -------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-1410
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Other
>            Reporter: Paul Elschot
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: autogen.tgz, LUCENE-1410-codecs.tar.bz2, LUCENE-1410b.patch, LUCENE-1410c.patch,
LUCENE-1410d.patch, LUCENE-1410e.patch, TermQueryTests.tgz,,,
>   Original Estimate: 21840h
>  Remaining Estimate: 21840h
> Implementation of Patched Frame of Reference.

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:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message