lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yonik Seeley" <yo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Intuition check
Date Thu, 08 Nov 2007 11:22:19 GMT
On Nov 7, 2007 4:10 PM, Mike Klaas <mike.klaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not sure if this went through--I sent using the wrong email addr.
>
> I've also posted a patch:
>   [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-407?
> page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm thinking of implementing something like "fq.nocache": a query
> restriction that would not be cached in filterCache.
>
> This is actually somewhat tricky to implement in the Guts of
> SolrIndexSearcher without adding a lot to the interface.  Then I
> realized that without caching, there really is no point in computing
> separate BitSets and intersecting them: it would be better to insert
> them directly into the BooleanQuery (or a wrapping BooleanQuery).
> This would also provide nicer skipTo behaviour (perhaps most docs
> needn't be scored before applying the filter).

Right.  This can speed things up if the filter matches few documents.

> Is there any reason to think that this wouldn't be the most efficient
> solution?  Obviously the clauses would be inserted with 0 boost.

I was going to suggest that the client could always just add the extra
clause themselves, but then I thought about dismax...

Rather than fq.nocache, how about decorating the existing fq via localParams:

fq=<!cache=false>

We already look for localParams anyway for query type info... so you
could also have something like:

fq=<!prefix f=myfield cache=false>foo

-Yonik

Mime
View raw message