You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Uwe Schindler (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2011/11/20 17:33:51 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3584) bulk postings should be codec
private
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13153827#comment-13153827 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-3584:
---------------------------------------
+1
Maybe we should also add buffering to 3.x, but thats not soo important.
> bulk postings should be codec private
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3584
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3584
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-3584.patch
>
>
> In LUCENE-2723, a lot of work was done to speed up Lucene's bulk postings read API.
> There were some upsides:
> * you could specify things like 'i dont care about frequency data up front'.
> This made things like multitermquery->filter and other consumers that don't
> care about freqs faster. But this is unrelated to 'bulkness' and we have a
> separate patch now for this on LUCENE-2929.
> * the buffersize for standardcodec was increased to 128, increasing performance
> for TermQueries, but this was unrelated too.
> But there were serious downsides/nocommits:
> * the API was hairy because it tried to be 'one-size-fits-all'. This made consumer code crazy.
> * the API could not really be specialized to your codec: e.g. could never take advantage that e.g. docs and freqs are aligned.
> * the API forced codecs to implement delta encoding for things like documents and positions.
> But this is totally up to the codec how it wants to encode! Some codecs might not use delta encoding.
> * using such an API for positions was only theoretical, it would have been super complicated and I doubt ever
> performant or maintainable.
> * there was a regression with advance(), probably because the api forced you to do both a linear scan thru
> the remaining buffer, then refill...
> I think a cleaner approach is to let codecs do whatever they want to implement the DISI
> contract. This lets codecs have the freedom to implement whatever compression/buffering they want
> for the best performance, and keeps consumers simple. If a codec uses delta encoding, or if it wants
> to defer this to the last possible minute or do it at decode time, thats its own business. Maybe a codec
> doesn't want to do any buffering at all.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org