Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 4921 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2010 20:52:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2010 20:52:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 64652 invoked by uid 500); 8 Dec 2010 20:52:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 64616 invoked by uid 500); 8 Dec 2010 20:52:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 64608 invoked by uid 99); 8 Dec 2010 20:52:28 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 20:52:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPF_NEUTRAL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [85.25.71.29] (HELO mail.troja.net) (85.25.71.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 20:52:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.troja.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCF5AD36007 for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:51:59 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.troja.net Received: from mail.troja.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (megaira.troja.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E0LZ5Sefg01Y for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:51:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from VEGA (unknown [89.204.153.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.troja.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9EEFD36004 for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:51:50 +0100 (CET) From: "Uwe Schindler" To: References: <1291790699063-2038419.post@n3.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1291790699063-2038419.post@n3.nabble.com> Subject: RE: FieldCacheRangeFilter Vs NumericRangeQuery Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:52:26 +0100 Message-ID: <024e01cb9719$d6dceb10$8496c130$@thetaphi.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 thread-index: AQIZ4N2HzXtalasbjJ5rljcgbEGPn5L6busQ Content-Language: de Hi Romi, Depending on how many documents are returned, FieldCacheRangeFilter (may) outperform NumericRangeQuery/Filter. But for sparse results, NumericRangeQuery performs much better. Look here: http://s.apache.org/tk Additionally take into account that the FieldCache must be built before the first query (warming) and FC only works correct with exactly one value / document. Missing values or more than one value break FieldCache usage for range filtering. FieldCacheRangeFilter is good, if you use it on fields you are already need for sorting and are in FieldCache already. Please note: Bothe NumericRangeFilter and FieldCacheRangeFilter can be used with CachingWrapperFilter. In this case, NumericRangeFilter is faster most times (when already cached). Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Romi [mailto:romijain3186@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 7:45 AM > To: general@lucene.apache.org > Subject: FieldCacheRangeFilter Vs NumericRangeQuery > > > Hi, > I am using Lucene3.0 for my project. I used FieldCacheRangeFilter (Static > method newLongRange()) with NumericRangeQuery in one implementation > of dateRangeQuery search and only NumericRangeQuery for another > implementation of dateRangeQuery search. > I found 17525 documents via both implementation but search time via > FieldCacheRangeFilter was 172milliseconds while via NumericRangeQuery > search it was 62milliseconds. > > I got confused because i was expecting that FieldCacheRangeFilter do search > faster. > Why it happened please explain. > > ----- > Romi > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/FieldCacheRangeFilter-Vs- > NumericRangeQuery-tp2038419p2038419.html > Sent from the Lucene - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.