[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5879?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14369723#comment-14369723
 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5879:
--------------------------------------------

Thanks Rob.

bq. If you use BitDocIdSet.Builder, I think it works well either way. 
SparseFixedBitSet also has optimized or(DISI).

I coded this up, but then this Builder is angry because FreqProxDocsEnum throws 
UOE from its cost method, because this is actually not easy to implement (we 
don't track docFreq for each term inside IW's RAM buffer).  I think for now we 
should just keep reusing a single FBS?

Looking @ BitDocIdSet.Builder it looks like it could do better here?  E.g. use 
this cost as just an approximation, but then since it had to .or() the actual 
set bits, record that as the "true" cost?

> Add auto-prefix terms to block tree terms dict
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-5879
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5879
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: core/codecs
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Michael McCandless
>             Fix For: 5.0, Trunk
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, 
> LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, 
> LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch, LUCENE-5879.patch
>
>
> This cool idea to generalize numeric/trie fields came from Adrien:
> Today, when we index a numeric field (LongField, etc.) we pre-compute
> (via NumericTokenStream) outside of indexer/codec which prefix terms
> should be indexed.
> But this can be inefficient: you set a static precisionStep, and
> always add those prefix terms regardless of how the terms in the field
> are actually distributed.  Yet typically in real world applications
> the terms have a non-random distribution.
> So, it should be better if instead the terms dict decides where it
> makes sense to insert prefix terms, based on how dense the terms are
> in each region of term space.
> This way we can speed up query time for both term (e.g. infix
> suggester) and numeric ranges, and it should let us use less index
> space and get faster range queries.
>  
> This would also mean that min/maxTerm for a numeric field would now be
> correct, vs today where the externally computed prefix terms are
> placed after the full precision terms, causing hairy code like
> NumericUtils.getMaxInt/Long.  So optos like LUCENE-5860 become
> feasible.
> The terms dict can also do tricks not possible if you must live on top
> of its APIs, e.g. to handle the adversary/over-constrained case when a
> given prefix has too many terms following it but finer prefixes
> have too few (what block tree calls "floor term blocks").



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to