lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Smiley (@MITRE.org)" <DSMI...@mitre.org>
Subject Re: FST and FieldCache?
Date Thu, 19 May 2011 14:53:53 GMT

Michael McCandless-2 wrote:
> 
> I think a more productive area of exploration (to reduce RAM usage)
> would be to make a StringFieldComparator that doesn't need full access
> to all terms data, ie, operates per segment yet only does a "few" ord
> lookups when merging the results across segments.  If "few" is small
> enough we can just use us the seek-by-ord from the terms dict to do
> them.  This would be a huge RAM reduction because we could then sort
> by string fields (eg "title" field) without needing all term bytes
> randomly accessible.
> 
> Mike
> 

Yes!  I don't want to put all my titles into RAM just to sort documents by
them when I know Lucene has indexed the titles in sorted order on disk
already.  Of course the devil is in the details.

~ David Smiley

-----
 Author: https://www.packtpub.com/solr-1-4-enterprise-search-server/book
--
View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/FST-and-FieldCache-tp2960030p2961687.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message