[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (LUCENE-1693) AttributeSource/TokenStream API improvements

["Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12731295#action_12731295 ] 

Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-1693 at 7/14/09 11:12 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

bq. However, if people are using next() in a chain with core streams/filters, then every single token will now be cloned, possibly multiple times, right?

That was a similar problem in 2.4, whenever you call next() to consume a stream, every token is a new instance. Only cloning WAS not needed but its now needed for BW compatibility ("full private copy").

In my opinion, this is neglectible, as indexing speed is important, and the indexer always uses incrementToken(). If somebody written an own query parser that uses next() to consume speed is not really important. And it is deprecated and in the docs (even in 2.4) stands: "but will be slower than calling next(Token)".

bq. So if people are using streams/filters that implement next(Token) I think the performance should be comparable - even though there's also a (hopefully small) performance hit to expect because of more method calls and if checks.

I found no performance hit, it is about same speed. The varieties between tests is bigger than a measureable performance impact. The other sensitive thing (TokenWrapper): The wrapping using TokenWrapper was in the original indexing code, too (this BackwardsCompatibilityStream private class).

bq. It's failing right now, because it's testing a lot of different combinations. I need to check if all of those different tests are actually valid, because we're saying you can't use Tee/Sink with the new API anymore. 

Have you seen my backwards compatibility test, too? It is a copy of yours (with some variation)? The Lucene24* classes were removed, because Tee/SinkTokenizer werde reverted to their original 2.4 status in the patch (only implement old API).
As far as I see (not yet tried out), you try to test new-style-API streams with the old Tee/Sink tokenizer, that is deprecated. You were not able to do this before 2.9 (no new API) and so the bw problem is not there. If you rewrite your streams with new API, you should use TeeSinkTokenizer, too.

      was (Author: thetaphi):
    bq. However, if people are using next() in a chain with core streams/filters, then every single token will now be cloned, possibly multiple times, right?

That was a similar problem in 2.4, whenever you call next() to consume a stream, every token is a new instance. Only cloning is not needed but its now needed for BW compatibility ("full private copy").

In my opinion, this is neglectible, as indexing speed is important, and the indexer always uses incrementToken(). If somebody written an own query parser that uses next() to consume speed is not really important. And it is deprecated and in the docs (even in 2.4) stands: "but will be slower than calling next(Token)".

bq. So if people are using streams/filters that implement next(Token) I think the performance should be comparable - even though there's also a (hopefully small) performance hit to expect because of more method calls and if checks.

I found no performance hit, it is about same speed. The varieties between tests is bigger than a measureable performance impact. The other sensitive thing (TokenWrapper): The wrapping using TokenWrapper was in the original indexing code, too (this BackwardsCompatibilityStream private class).

bq. It's failing right now, because it's testing a lot of different combinations. I need to check if all of those different tests are actually valid, because we're saying you can't use Tee/Sink with the new API anymore. 

Have you seen my backwards compatibility test, too? It is a copy of yours (with some variation)? The Lucene24* classes were removed, because Tee/SinkTokenizer werde reverted to their original 2.4 status in the patch (only implement old API).
As far as I see (not yet tried out), you try to test new-style-API streams with the old Tee/Sink tokenizer, that is deprecated. You were not able to do this before 2.9 (no new API) and so the bw problem is not there. If you rewrite your streams with new API, you should use TeeSinkTokenizer, too.
  
> AttributeSource/TokenStream API improvements
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1693
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1693
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Analysis
>            Reporter: Michael Busch
>            Assignee: Michael Busch
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, LUCENE-1693.patch, lucene-1693.patch, TestAPIBackwardsCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java, TestCompatibility.java
>
>
> This patch makes the following improvements to AttributeSource and
> TokenStream/Filter:
> - removes the set/getUseNewAPI() methods (including the standard
>   ones). Instead by default incrementToken() throws a subclass of
>   UnsupportedOperationException. The indexer tries to call
>   incrementToken() initially once to see if the exception is thrown;
>   if so, it falls back to the old API.
> - introduces interfaces for all Attributes. The corresponding
>   implementations have the postfix 'Impl', e.g. TermAttribute and
>   TermAttributeImpl. AttributeSource now has a factory for creating
>   the Attribute instances; the default implementation looks for
>   implementing classes with the postfix 'Impl'. Token now implements
>   all 6 TokenAttribute interfaces.
> - new method added to AttributeSource:
>   addAttributeImpl(AttributeImpl). Using reflection it walks up in the
>   class hierarchy of the passed in object and finds all interfaces
>   that the class or superclasses implement and that extend the
>   Attribute interface. It then adds the interface->instance mappings
>   to the attribute map for each of the found interfaces.
> - AttributeImpl now has a default implementation of toString that uses
>   reflection to print out the values of the attributes in a default
>   formatting. This makes it a bit easier to implement AttributeImpl,
>   because toString() was declared abstract before.
> - Cloning is now done much more efficiently in
>   captureState. The method figures out which unique AttributeImpl
>   instances are contained as values in the attributes map, because
>   those are the ones that need to be cloned. It creates a single
>   linked list that supports deep cloning (in the inner class
>   AttributeSource.State). AttributeSource keeps track of when this
>   state changes, i.e. whenever new attributes are added to the
>   AttributeSource. Only in that case will captureState recompute the
>   state, otherwise it will simply clone the precomputed state and
>   return the clone. restoreState(AttributeSource.State) walks the
>   linked list and uses the copyTo() method of AttributeImpl to copy
>   all values over into the attribute that the source stream
>   (e.g. SinkTokenizer) uses. 
> The cloning performance can be greatly improved if not multiple
> AttributeImpl instances are used in one TokenStream. A user can
> e.g. simply add a Token instance to the stream instead of the individual
> attributes. Or the user could implement a subclass of AttributeImpl that
> implements exactly the Attribute interfaces needed. I think this
> should be considered an expert API (addAttributeImpl), as this manual
> optimization is only needed if cloning performance is crucial. I ran
> some quick performance tests using Tee/Sink tokenizers (which do
> cloning) and the performance was roughly 20% faster with the new
> API. I'll run some more performance tests and post more numbers then.
> Note also that when we add serialization to the Attributes, e.g. for
> supporting storing serialized TokenStreams in the index, then the
> serialization should benefit even significantly more from the new API
> than cloning. 
> Also, the TokenStream API does not change, except for the removal 
> of the set/getUseNewAPI methods. So the patches in LUCENE-1460
> should still work.
> All core tests pass, however, I need to update all the documentation
> and also add some unit tests for the new AttributeSource
> functionality. So this patch is not ready to commit yet, but I wanted
> to post it already for some feedback. 

-- 
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: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org