[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1064?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12522978
 ] 

Ard Schrijvers commented on JCR-1064:
-------------------------------------

Marcel Reutegger wrote:
One more thing, please"include a check in SearchIndex.doInit(), which compares 
the IndexFormatVersion of 'this' with the parent query handler (if there is 
one). They have to be the same, otherwise queries might return wrong results. "

The current patch is without this test in the parent query handler, because 
AFAICS everything works without this test (the parent handler does not need to 
have the PROPERTY_SET fieldname AFAIU ). 

Futhermore, I added a boolean 'newWorkSpaceIndex' to the MultiIndex.java, since 
the initial index creation when none exists is done there. As Marcel suggested, 
SearchIndex.doInit() might be a better place for this index creation. 

Do you think the current patch can be applied to the trunk? 

> Optimize queries that check for the existence of a property
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JCR-1064
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1064
>             Project: Jackrabbit
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: indexing
>    Affects Versions: 1.3.1
>            Reporter: Ard Schrijvers
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.4
>
>         Attachments: JCR-1064-2.patch, JCR-1064-2.patch, JCR-1064-DEPR.patch
>
>
> //[EMAIL PROTECTED] is transformed into the 
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.query.lucene.MatchAllQuery, that through the 
> MatchAllWeight uses the MatchAllScorer.  The calculateDocFilter() in 
> MatchAllScorer  does not scale and becomes slow for growing number of nodes. 
> Solution: lucene documents will get a new Field:
> public static final String PROPERTIES_SET = "_:PROPERTIES_SET".intern();
> that holds the available properties of this document. 
> NOTE: Lucene indices build without this performance improvement should still 
> work and fall back to the original implementation

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to