Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-lucene-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39745 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2005 01:19:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Jan 2005 01:19:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 80049 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2005 01:19:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-lucene-user-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 80012 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2005 01:19:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Lucene Users List" Reply-To: "Lucene Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 79998 invoked by uid 99); 6 Jan 2005 01:19:13 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from act-ironport-ext-out1.csiro.au (HELO act-ironport-ext-out1.csiro.au) (150.229.7.37) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Jan 2005 17:19:09 -0800 Received: from exgw1-cbr.nexus.csiro.au (152.83.3.66) by act-ironport-ext-out1.csiro.au with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2005 12:19:05 +1100 X-BrightmailFiltered: true X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAA+k= X-IronPort-AV: i="3.88,103,1102251600"; d="scan'208"; a="24458762:sNHT20241092" Received: from EXACTN2-CBR.nexus.csiro.au ([152.83.3.133]) by exgw1-cbr.nexus.csiro.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:17:46 +1100 Received: from EXSA2-ADL.sa.csiro.au ([144.110.67.52]) by EXACTN2-CBR.nexus.csiro.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:17:46 +1100 Received: from [144.110.32.63] ([144.110.32.63]) by EXSA2-ADL.sa.csiro.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 11:47:45 +1030 Message-ID: <41DC91B9.9040107@csiro.au> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 11:17:45 +1000 From: Andrew Cunningham User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lucene Users List Subject: Span Query Performance References: <41DC78CF.1020302@sun.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2005 01:17:45.0725 (UTC) FILETIME=[873062D0:01C4F38D] X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi all, I'm currently doing a query similar to the following: for w in wordset: query = w near (word1 V word2 V word3 ... V word1422); perform query and I am doing this through SpanQuery.getSpans(), iterating through the spans and counting the matches, which can result in 4782282 matches (essentially I am only after the match count). The query works but the performance can be somewhat slow; so I am wondering: a) Would the query potentially run faster if I used Searcher.search(query) with a custom similarity, or do both methods essentially use the same mechanics b) Does using a RAMDirectory improve query performance any significant amount. c) Is there a faster method to what I am doing I should consider? Thanks, Andrew --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org