lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <>
Subject Re: (LUCENE-3892) Add a useful intblock postings format (eg, FOR, PFOR, PFORDelta, Simple9/16/64, etc.)
Date Sat, 11 Aug 2012 18:58:39 GMT
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Robert Muir <> wrote:
> I'm having a tough time remembering what these packed ints options do
> (I thought the perf boost from allowing overhead came from upgrading
> to the next byte boundary?)

Upgrading to the next byte boundary, or using PACKED_SINGLE_BLOCK when possible.

> Anyway: again I'm a little concerned about the wikipedia benchmark
> here for this purpose.

We should find another corpus/corpora to also test...

> For e.g. structured content from databases (tiny fields) where the
> numbers are much tinier on average the numbers could be different. I'm
> also worried about the fact
> that decode speed is over-emphasized in the wikipedia benchmark since
> all the I/O is hot.


> So I think if its this ambiguous for wikipedia we should shoot for the
> most COMPACT form as a safe default.


Mike McCandless

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message