[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6645?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14629511#comment-14629511
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-6645:
---------------------------------------------------------
Commit 1691344 from [~jpountz] in branch 'dev/branches/branch_5x'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1691344 ]
LUCENE-6645: Remove BitDocIdSetBuilder from lucene-spatial as well.
> BKD tree queries should use BitDocIdSet.Builder
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6645
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6645
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: 5.3, Trunk
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-6645-spatial.patch, LUCENE-6645.patch,
> LUCENE-6645.patch, LUCENE-6645.patch, LUCENE-6645.patch, LUCENE-6645.patch,
> LUCENE-6645.patch
>
>
> When I was iterating on BKD tree originally I remember trying to use this
> builder (which makes a sparse bit set at first and then upgrades to dense if
> enough bits get set) and being disappointed with its performance.
> I wound up just making a FixedBitSet every time, but this is obviously
> wasteful for small queries.
> It could be the perf was poor because I was always .or'ing in DISIs that had
> 512 - 1024 hits each time (the size of each leaf cell in the BKD tree)? I
> also had to make my own DISI wrapper around each leaf cell... maybe that was
> the source of the slowness, not sure.
> I also sort of wondered whether the SmallDocSet in spatial module (backed by
> a SentinelIntSet) might be faster ... though it'd need to be sorted in the
> and after building before returning to Lucene.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
