Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87AE200BD3 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 19:50:00 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id D7003160B17; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:50:00 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C08D160B29 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 19:50:00 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 78281 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2016 18:49:59 -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 77912 invoked by uid 99); 6 Dec 2016 18:49:58 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Dec 2016 18:49:58 +0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arcas (Postfix) with ESMTP id A663F2C03E3 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:49:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:49:58 +0000 (UTC) From: "Yonik Seeley (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-9822) Improve faceting performance with FieldCache MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 18:50:01 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9822?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15726360#comment-15726360 ] Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-9822: ------------------------------------ I tried yet another approach of bulk gathering the id+ord in an array and then looping over that in the calling code, but it was much slower than the lambda (although still faster than current master w/o patching by 10%). Still slow enough I won't bother attaching the patch. In the spirit of progress over perfection, we should probably just commit the first approach (since it gives a 50% speedup in those cases.), but limited to the two call sites in that patch (in FacetFieldProcessorByArrayDV). We shouldn't over-generalize the results found here. It may be that a lambda-type approach will work better in other contexts, and those will need to be tested. It's also the case that encapsulating this logic will make it easier to introduce/maintain additional optimizations such as actually using the skipping of the docvalues iterator when it's sparse vs our domain set). > Improve faceting performance with FieldCache > -------------------------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-9822 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9822 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Sub-task > Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) > Components: Facet Module > Reporter: Yonik Seeley > Assignee: Yonik Seeley > Fix For: master (7.0) > > Attachments: SOLR-9822.patch, SOLR-9822_OrdValues.patch, SOLR-9822_lambda.patch > > > This issue will try to specifically address the performance regressions of faceting on FieldCache fields observed in SOLR-9599. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org