From general-return-3316-apmail-lucene-general-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Sat May 28 06:28:38 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A33366C0 for ; Sat, 28 May 2011 06:28:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 36990 invoked by uid 500); 28 May 2011 06:28:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 36645 invoked by uid 500); 28 May 2011 06:28:30 -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 36637 invoked by uid 99); 28 May 2011 06:28:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 May 2011 06:28:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL,T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 216.139.236.26 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of wave@vancameron.net) Received: from [216.139.236.26] (HELO sam.nabble.com) (216.139.236.26) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 May 2011 06:28:22 +0000 Received: from ben.nabble.com ([192.168.236.152]) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QQD0C-0007rq-RU for general@lucene.apache.org; Fri, 27 May 2011 23:28:00 -0700 Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 23:28:00 -0700 (PDT) From: "wave@vancameron.net" To: general@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: <1306564080828-2995495.post@n3.nabble.com> Subject: Query performance, bitset, btree MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, I'm new to Lucene. I have a question about performance. I have a structured dataset split up into fields, for example name, age, city, state. I want to query this dataset for exact matches to fields, e.g. name="John" and age=30 and city="London". For such a dataset, how will performance of Lucene compare with a database table with an appropriate index (e.g. index on name, age, city)? The dataset is pretty static so index update performance is not an issue for me. >From what I understand, Lucene uses bitset indexes while a typical database index will use a b-tree (or hash). I'll admit I don't fully understand what a bitset index is. What types of datasets and queries take best advantage of bitset indexes vs a btree index? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Query-performance-bitset-btree-tp2995495p2995495.html Sent from the Lucene - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.