Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42163 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2005 02:26:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Jun 2005 02:26:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 76685 invoked by uid 500); 25 Jun 2005 02:26:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 76645 invoked by uid 500); 25 Jun 2005 02:26:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 76629 invoked by uid 99); 25 Jun 2005 02:26:04 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:26:04 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=10.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,RCVD_BY_IP X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of chenjian1227@gmail.com designates 64.233.170.202 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.170.202] (HELO rproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.170.202) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:26:04 -0700 Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 1so137010rny for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=E5gAYP466Y6z4TXCbcpcadTU7mimhxGSotnMXyRIuP3eY2BRSeQDZ/Xcw9/iAkiKLXDsamiB2qDvqAIbIZQDYyFP60Ty8a890WPFgGhFWyrrGueh+6495WVPvfvAbEt5zgcKffDGgdh7Ue0dRRJ7SNeV4d+7X6m4bhb1chyfxMo= Received: by 10.38.103.16 with SMTP id a16mr105580rnc; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.8.79 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7ca1239105062419263266dc2b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:26:01 -0700 From: jian chen Reply-To: jian chen To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Span query performance issue In-Reply-To: <1119657618.1663020537.32764.sendItem@bloglines.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <1119657618.1663020537.32764.sendItem@bloglines.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, I think Span query in general should do more work than simple Phrase query. Phrase query, in its simplest form, should just try to find all terms that are adjacent to each other. Meanwhile, Span query does not necessary be adjacent to each other, but, with other words in between. Therefore, I think Span query deserves to be slower than Phrase query. This said, Span query is way more powerful than Phrase query. Jian On 25 Jun 2005 00:00:18 -0000, yahootintin.11533894@bloglines.com wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I'm comparing SpanNearQuery to PhraseQuery results and noticing about > an 8x difference on Linux. Is a SpanNearQuery doing 8x as much work? >=20 >=20 > I'm considering diving into the code if the results sounds unusual to peo= ple. > But if its really doing that much more work, I won't spend time optimizi= ng > something that can't get much faster. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org