lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bo_b ...@staff.jubii.dk>
Subject Re: Optimizing a schema
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:25:05 GMT


Yonik Seeley wrote:
> 
> No, they will be roughly the same speed.
> What you *could* try to do is always *index* documents in postid/date
> order... then sorting would not require any FieldCache entry.  It
> would require a minor change to Solr (allow sorting on lucene internal
> docid, which matches the order that documents are added to an index).
> 
OK, I will look into that, if would be nice to avoid the delay when building
fieldcaches after a commit. 


Yonik Seeley wrote:
> 
> If you need range queries, SortableIntField  values are ordered
> correctly for them to work.
> For sorting, both int and sint fields work... the difference is in how
> the FieldCache entry is built.
>   For IntField, an Integer.parseInt(str) needs to be done for each
> distinct str.
>   SortableIntField is sorted like strings... the ordinal (order in the
> index) is recorded for each distinct value.
> 
>   So sint will build the FieldCache faster, but the string values will
> cause the entry to be larger.  Aftert the FieldCache entry is built,
> both int and sint should be comparable in speed.
> 

I will test it and see what works the best, I think we would prefer being
able to build the fieldcaches faster.

Thanks for all the helpful explanations/hints :)
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Optimizing-a-schema-tf2071403.html#a5708887
Sent from the Solr - User forum at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message