Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 94202 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2010 15:58:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 1 Jun 2010 15:58:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 22687 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2010 15:58:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 22545 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2010 15:58:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 22538 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2010 15:58:19 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:58:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1485.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.22] (HELO thor.apache.org) (140.211.11.22) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:58:18 +0000 Received: from thor (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thor.apache.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o51FvwDg020021 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:57:58 GMT Message-ID: <5484266.106871275407878548.JavaMail.jira@thor> Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 11:57:58 -0400 (EDT) From: "Andrzej Bialecki (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (SOLR-1316) Create autosuggest component MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1316?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12874084#action_12874084 ] Andrzej Bialecki commented on SOLR-1316: ----------------------------------------- I would expect the facet.prefix method to consume less additional RAM dedicated to this functionality (because field caches are shared among different components), but I doubt it could beat the performance of ternary tries. Also, in many situations it makes sense to populate an auto-complete component from a query log, and not from the index. If you want to offer phrase-based autocomplete then using facet.prefix method you would have to create an additional field populated with shingles, and then the RAM cost would grow tremendously, whereas with TST this increase would be moderate. Regarding specific numbers ... if you have a test setup for facet.prefix feel free to apply this patch and test it, we'd love to see your results - see also the numbers above for 100k random strings. > Create autosuggest component > ---------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-1316 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1316 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: search > Affects Versions: 1.4 > Reporter: Jason Rutherglen > Assignee: Shalin Shekhar Mangar > Priority: Minor > Fix For: Next > > Attachments: SOLR-1316.patch, SOLR-1316.patch, SOLR-1316.patch, SOLR-1316.patch, SOLR-1316.patch, SOLR-1316.patch, suggest.patch, suggest.patch, suggest.patch, TST.zip > > Original Estimate: 96h > Remaining Estimate: 96h > > Autosuggest is a common search function that can be integrated > into Solr as a SearchComponent. Our first implementation will > use the TernaryTree found in Lucene contrib. > * Enable creation of the dictionary from the index or via Solr's > RPC mechanism > * What types of parameters and settings are desirable? > * Hopefully in the future we can include user click through > rates to boost those terms/phrases higher -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org