[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1064?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12529762
]
Ard Schrijvers commented on JCR-1064:
-------------------------------------
I have done the tests with old style indices and remove the parent handler
index or the workspace index, tried with new style indices, all work as they
should.
Also like the replacement of the IndexFormatVersion.version from String to int,
to make future versions number possible. So, AFAICS, everything seems to work
how it should.
Thanks both for all the help regarding this issue.
> 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-1064-2.patch,
> JCR-1064-2.patch, JCR-1064-3.patch, JCR-1064-4.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.
