You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by lu...@jakarta.apache.org on 2004/03/30 00:05:59 UTC
[Jakarta Lucene Wiki] Updated: DateRangeQueries
Date: 2004-03-29T14:05:55
Editor: 66.130.16.51 <>
Wiki: Jakarta Lucene Wiki
Page: DateRangeQueries
URL: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-lucene/DateRangeQueries
Added results
Change Log:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -1,9 +1,21 @@
= Issues concerning DateRangeQueries =
== Caching ==
- A DateFilter does not cache, so each search re-enumerates the terms in the range. In fact, DateFilter by itself is practically of no use (Erik Hatcher), I think.
+ A DateFilter does not cache, so each search re-enumerates the terms in the range. In fact, DateFilter by itself is practically of no use (Erik Hatcher, [http://www.mail-archive.com/lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org/msg07015.html message]). The cache is help in the IndexReader.
If you have a set of canned date ranges, there are two approaches worth considering:
||DateFilter wrapped by a CachingWrappingFilter||
||RangeQuery wrapped in a QueryFilter (which does cache)||
+
+
+ Kevin A. Burton posted some results (response time in ms):
+
+ ||Before caching the Field||After caching the field||
+ ||2238||2253||
+ ||1910||10||
+ ||1899||10||
+ ||1901||6||
+ ||1904||8||
+ ||1906||6||
+
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org