You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by "T. Kuro Kurosaka" <ku...@healthline.com> on 2013/11/05 19:36:14 UTC
geo/spatial search performance comparison using different methods
Are there any performance comparison results available comparing various
methods
to sort result by distance (not just filtering) on Solr 3 and 4?
We are using Solr 3.5 with Solr-2155 patch. I am particularly interested
in learning
performance difference among Solr 3 LatLongType, Solr-2155 GeoHash,
Solr 4 implementation of GeoHash and Solr 4's
SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType
(location_rpt).
I see comparison of Solr 3 LatLongType vs Solr-2155
3.6.2-work/example/solr/conf/
but it is 2 years old.
--
-----------------------------------------
T. "Kuro" Kurosaka • Senior Software Engineer
Healthline Networks, Inc. • Connect to Better Health
www.healthline.com
Re: geo/spatial search performance comparison using different
methods
Posted by "Smiley, David W." <ds...@mitre.org>.
Any guesses would be wild ones, but I'm pretty sure you'll notice it,
assuming the result size isn't trivially small. Also, LatLonType will use
much less memory and be more real-time search friendly (i.e. Commit
warming will be faster, assuming you do warming queries as everyone should
do).
To be clear, I think you should continue to use SOLR-2155/RPT for spatial
filtering -- that's what that technology does best.
~ David
On 11/6/13 3:22 PM, "T. Kuro Kurosaka" <ku...@healthline.com> wrote:
>Thank you, David.
>I believe the field doesn't need to be multivalued.
>Can you give me some idea how much query-time performance gain
>we can expect by switching to LatLonType from Solr-2155?
>
>On 11/06/2013 09:56 AM, Smiley, David W. wrote:
>> Hi Kuro,
>>
>> I don't know of any benchmarks featuring distance-sort performance.
>>
>> Presumably you are using SOLR-2155 because you have multi-valued spatial
>> fields? If so, LatLonType is not an option. SOLR-2155 sorting
>> performance is *probably* about the same as the equivalent in Solr 4
>>RPT.
>> If you actually do have single valued spatial to sort on, then
>>definitely
>> don't use SOLR-2155 or RPT for that, use LatLonType. It's surely faster
>> but I haven't measured it.
>>
>> The best multi-valued distance sort option for Solr 4 is currently this:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5170
>>
>>
>> ~ David
>>
>> On 11/5/13 1:36 PM, "T. Kuro Kurosaka" <ku...@healthline.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any performance comparison results available comparing
>>>various
>>> methods
>>> to sort result by distance (not just filtering) on Solr 3 and 4?
>>>
>>> We are using Solr 3.5 with Solr-2155 patch. I am particularly
>>>interested
>>> in learning
>>> performance difference among Solr 3 LatLongType, Solr-2155 GeoHash,
>>> Solr 4 implementation of GeoHash and Solr 4's
>>> SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType
>>> (location_rpt).
>>>
>>> I see comparison of Solr 3 LatLongType vs Solr-2155
>>> 3.6.2-work/example/solr/conf/
>>> but it is 2 years old.
>>>
>>> --
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> T. "Kuro" Kurosaka € Senior Software Engineer
>>> Healthline Networks, Inc. € Connect to Better Health
>>> www.healthline.com
>>>
>>>
>
>--
>-----------------------------------------
>T. "Kuro" Kurosaka • Senior Software Engineer
>p: 415-281-3100x3261 f: 415-281-3199
>Healthline Networks, Inc. • Connect to Better Health
>660 Third Street, San Francisco, CA 94107 www.healthline.com
>About Us: www.healthlinenetworks.net | Media Kit: mediakit.healthline.com
>
Re: geo/spatial search performance comparison using different methods
Posted by "T. Kuro Kurosaka" <ku...@healthline.com>.
Thank you, David.
I believe the field doesn't need to be multivalued.
Can you give me some idea how much query-time performance gain
we can expect by switching to LatLonType from Solr-2155?
On 11/06/2013 09:56 AM, Smiley, David W. wrote:
> Hi Kuro,
>
> I don't know of any benchmarks featuring distance-sort performance.
>
> Presumably you are using SOLR-2155 because you have multi-valued spatial
> fields? If so, LatLonType is not an option. SOLR-2155 sorting
> performance is *probably* about the same as the equivalent in Solr 4 RPT.
> If you actually do have single valued spatial to sort on, then definitely
> don't use SOLR-2155 or RPT for that, use LatLonType. It's surely faster
> but I haven't measured it.
>
> The best multi-valued distance sort option for Solr 4 is currently this:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5170
>
>
> ~ David
>
> On 11/5/13 1:36 PM, "T. Kuro Kurosaka" <ku...@healthline.com> wrote:
>
>> Are there any performance comparison results available comparing various
>> methods
>> to sort result by distance (not just filtering) on Solr 3 and 4?
>>
>> We are using Solr 3.5 with Solr-2155 patch. I am particularly interested
>> in learning
>> performance difference among Solr 3 LatLongType, Solr-2155 GeoHash,
>> Solr 4 implementation of GeoHash and Solr 4's
>> SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType
>> (location_rpt).
>>
>> I see comparison of Solr 3 LatLongType vs Solr-2155
>> 3.6.2-work/example/solr/conf/
>> but it is 2 years old.
>>
>> --
>> -----------------------------------------
>> T. "Kuro" Kurosaka € Senior Software Engineer
>> Healthline Networks, Inc. € Connect to Better Health
>> www.healthline.com
>>
>>
--
-----------------------------------------
T. "Kuro" Kurosaka • Senior Software Engineer
p: 415-281-3100x3261 f: 415-281-3199
Healthline Networks, Inc. • Connect to Better Health
660 Third Street, San Francisco, CA 94107 www.healthline.com
About Us: www.healthlinenetworks.net | Media Kit: mediakit.healthline.com
Re: geo/spatial search performance comparison using different
methods
Posted by "Smiley, David W." <ds...@mitre.org>.
Hi Kuro,
I don't know of any benchmarks featuring distance-sort performance.
Presumably you are using SOLR-2155 because you have multi-valued spatial
fields? If so, LatLonType is not an option. SOLR-2155 sorting
performance is *probably* about the same as the equivalent in Solr 4 RPT.
If you actually do have single valued spatial to sort on, then definitely
don't use SOLR-2155 or RPT for that, use LatLonType. It's surely faster
but I haven't measured it.
The best multi-valued distance sort option for Solr 4 is currently this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5170
~ David
On 11/5/13 1:36 PM, "T. Kuro Kurosaka" <ku...@healthline.com> wrote:
>Are there any performance comparison results available comparing various
>methods
>to sort result by distance (not just filtering) on Solr 3 and 4?
>
>We are using Solr 3.5 with Solr-2155 patch. I am particularly interested
>in learning
>performance difference among Solr 3 LatLongType, Solr-2155 GeoHash,
>Solr 4 implementation of GeoHash and Solr 4's
>SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType
>(location_rpt).
>
>I see comparison of Solr 3 LatLongType vs Solr-2155
>3.6.2-work/example/solr/conf/
>but it is 2 years old.
>
>--
>-----------------------------------------
>T. "Kuro" Kurosaka € Senior Software Engineer
>Healthline Networks, Inc. € Connect to Better Health
>www.healthline.com
>
>