Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 83898 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2010 09:05:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 1 Apr 2010 09:05:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 9266 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2010 09:05:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 9228 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2010 09:05:49 -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 9220 invoked by uid 99); 1 Apr 2010 09:05:49 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 09:05:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ian.lea@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.222 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.222] (HELO mail-bw0-f222.google.com) (209.85.218.222) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 09:05:41 +0000 Received: by bwz22 with SMTP id 22so729366bwz.5 for ; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 02:05:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:received:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oTo7AtsE/B5Dti5wcF1jgz8Ye4bY8F0TgzgAQMAFooM=; b=op3Z/3zUxtTf3oTxsRsRgOGZ4Ano37jJDhfXvkhuDGkIKFRmpzako4GzVZaJW1cZ/o R/QDAjue25o+dfZixjwm0aj413fhw4Ocr8zSkCGqC7c6M30xNTHOHtZf3MDvC3tkvZBP M2YufjVZMKtVY7kS4gR7jD01VH6o3PMn+YPZk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AVb/okg5uN6PCjLoQLUeXbo5kD5yRL8zQjCXhuwvvM6MmgnyoNNt3V9Q9NMaAjGU6d wGrQoLD56cb4Zi0eOqUKC3PQAN9bpY3caGLmB8D7EB//bhY9n41TT5H6Y/RLM8TO6+UW BW6t+Bz82gRmOwhlTjpliRXVtsR5b/PvdvzC8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.46.104 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 02:05:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <8D42DCC0-4E03-4F8B-A6CC-C53890910C7E@transpac.com> From: Ian Lea Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:05:01 +0100 Received: by 10.204.6.212 with SMTP id a20mr1091505bka.22.1270112721293; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 02:05:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: query: order of search To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > Query I > Does the order of query play role in searching > example:doc has fields > rollno(pk), name, marks > > Query : marks=3D90&rollno=3D2&name=3Dabc > > Query :rollno=3D2&name=3Dabc&marks=3D90 > > which query processing will be more efficient. > is it work like search doc field by field , it will look for doc having > rollno=3D2 then from thos will look for name abc and from the selected do= cs > will again look for marks param . I don't think it makes any difference. > Query II > =A0which =A0is more faster . > a) =A0adding one more multivalued field into current index(large) > b) =A0or creating a separate index for the field and searching it as a > subindex . > My main apprehensions is in regard to large size of index Probably your first option. -- Ian. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org