[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15183685#comment-15183685
 ] 

Nicholas Knize commented on LUCENE-7056:
----------------------------------------

I'm also not sure I'm comfortable making definitive performance statements 
based on the London test set? While its testing with a reasonable amount of 
data and many queries, its not exercising anything beyond a relatively small 
bounding area. For example, I noticed considerable performance degradation when 
exercising BKD w/ Geo3D/Spatial3D on global data sets (simply through 
beasting). This is when adversarial rectangles were created like: 
http://imagebin.ca/v/2ZSrT1nVbIHn and the postings based approach actually 
performed better. In performance testing TermEnum updates I also noticed orders 
of magnitude improvements when beasting the testcases and only marginal 
improvements when testing with the London set. 

I've spent a bit of time working on adding Geo benchmarks to luceneutil. I 
think we can make more informed decisions about what to add/remove and which 
approach to use once we have decent nightly benchmarks to characterize 
performance. Remember, the Postings approach is not an "incorrect" or even a 
wholly "suboptimal" approach. Its a raster approach which lends itself well to 
certain use-cases. 

> Spatial3d/Geo3d should have zero runtime dependencies
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-7056
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: modules/spatial3d
>            Reporter: David Smiley
>            Assignee: David Smiley
>             Fix For: 6.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE_7056__split_spatial3d_package.patch, 
> LUCENE_7056__split_spatial3d_package.patch
>
>
> This is a proposal for the "spatial3d" module to be purely about the 
> shape/geometry implementations it has.  In Lucene 5 that's actually all it 
> has.  In Lucene 6 at the moment its ~76 files have 2 classes that I think 
> should go elsewhere: Geo3DPoint and PointInGeo3DShapeQuery.  Specifically 
> lucene-spatial-extras (which doesn't quite exist yet so lucene-spatial) would 
> be a suitable place due to the dependency.   _Eventually_ I see this module 
> migrating elsewhere be it on its own or a part of something else more 
> spatial-ish.  Even if that never comes to pass, non-Lucene users who want to 
> use this module for it's geometry annoyingly have to exclude the Lucene 
> dependencies that are there because this module also contains these two 
> classes.
> In a comment I'll suggest some specifics.



--
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

Reply via email to