Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DBBD11E89 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 72010 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2011 08:30:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 71965 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2011 08:30:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 71958 invoked by uid 99); 26 Apr 2011 08:30:44 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:44 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.116] (HELO hel.zones.apache.org) (140.211.11.116) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:42 +0000 Received: from hel.zones.apache.org (hel.zones.apache.org [140.211.11.116]) by hel.zones.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3893CB4737 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:03 +0000 (UTC) From: "Simon Willnauer (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: <1331083692.1828.1303806603228.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-2186) First cut at column-stride fields (index values storage) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13025130#comment-13025130 ] Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-2186: ----------------------------------------- bq. What's the current status on this? I am currently focusing on RT and DWPT to be landed on trunk. Once this is done I can merge DocValues and finish the last remaining limitations. Its pretty close there are a couple of issues like javadoc (not complete but close), Codec integration is somewhat flaky and needs some new api. Feature wise its complete. > First cut at column-stride fields (index values storage) > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-2186 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2186 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: Index > Reporter: Michael McCandless > Assignee: Simon Willnauer > Fix For: CSF branch, 4.0 > > Attachments: LUCENE-2186.patch, LUCENE-2186.patch, LUCENE-2186.patch, LUCENE-2186.patch, LUCENE-2186.patch, mem.py > > > I created an initial basic impl for storing "index values" (ie > column-stride value storage). This is still a work in progress... but > the approach looks compelling. I'm posting my current status/patch > here to get feedback/iterate, etc. > The code is standalone now, and lives under new package > oal.index.values (plus some util changes, refactorings) -- I have yet > to integrate into Lucene so eg you can mark that a given Field's value > should be stored into the index values, sorting will use these values > instead of field cache, etc. > It handles 3 types of values: > * Six variants of byte[] per doc, all combinations of fixed vs > variable length, and stored either "straight" (good for eg a > "title" field), "deref" (good when many docs share the same value, > but you won't do any sorting) or "sorted". > * Integers (variable bit precision used as necessary, ie this can > store byte/short/int/long, and all precisions in between) > * Floats (4 or 8 byte precision) > String fields are stored as the UTF8 byte[]. This patch adds a > BytesRef, which does the same thing as flex's TermRef (we should merge > them). > This patch also adds basic initial impl of PackedInts (LUCENE-1990); > we can swap that out if/when we get a better impl. > This storage is dense (like field cache), so it's appropriate when the > field occurs in all/most docs. It's just like field cache, except the > reading API is a get() method invocation, per document. > Next step is to do basic integration with Lucene, and then compare > sort performance of this vs field cache. > For the "sort by String value" case, I think RAM usage & GC load of > this index values API should be much better than field caache, since > it does not create object per document (instead shares big long[] and > byte[] across all docs), and because the values are stored in RAM as > their UTF8 bytes. > There are abstract Writer/Reader classes. The current reader impls > are entirely RAM resident (like field cache), but the API is (I think) > agnostic, ie, one could make an MMAP impl instead. > I think this is the first baby step towards LUCENE-1231. Ie, it > cannot yet update values, and the reading API is fully random-access > by docID (like field cache), not like a posting list, though I > do think we should add an iterator() api (to return flex's DocsEnum) > -- eg I think this would be a good way to track avg doc/field length > for BM25/lnu.ltc scoring. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org