Those are nice speedups! Did you use the 4.0 branch (ie trunk) or the bulkpostings branch for this test?
Mike On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Li Li <fancye...@gmail.com> wrote: > great improvement! > I did a test in our data set. doc count is about 2M+ and index size > after optimization is about 13.3GB(including fdt) > it seems lucene4's index format is better than lucene2.9.3. and PFor > give good results. > Besides BlockEncoder for frq and pos. is there any other modification > for lucene 4? > > decoder \ avg time single word(ms) and > query(ms) or query(ms) > VINT in lucene 2.9 11.2 > 36.5 38.6 > VINT in lucene 4 branch 10.6 > 26.5 35.4 > PFor in lucene 4 branch 8.1 > 22.5 30.7 > 2010/12/21 Li Li <fancye...@gmail.com>: >>> OK we should have a look at that one still. We need to converge on a >>> good default codec for 4.0. Fortunately it's trivial to take any int >>> block encoder (fixed or variable block) and make a Lucene codec out of >>> it! >> >> I suggests you not to use this one, I fixed dozens of bugs but it >> still failed when with random tests. it's codes is hand coded rather >> than generated by program. But we may learn something from it. >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
