[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7863?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mikhail Khludnev updated LUCENE-7863:
-------------------------------------
Attachment: bench-byte-array2.out
Here is solid benchmark log [^bench-byte-array2.out] with running both rounds
one by one: edgeNgram then derivativeTerms.
composing same result table again:
|round|indexing, sec|search req/sec|ram total, GB |index size, GB|
| EdgeNGramm |5,890.05|61.55|2,7|23|
|derived edges|6,981.87|26.51|11.5|8.4|
It's somewhat different. Derived terms indexing is slower, probably because of
really small RAM buffer, which I set earlier. Search time is 3 times slower.
> Don't repeat postings (and perhaps positions) on ReverseWF, EdgeNGram, etc
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7863
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7863
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Mikhail Khludnev
> Attachments: bench-byte-array2.out, benchmark-1m.out,
> LUCENE-7863.hazard, LUCENE-7863.patch, LUCENE-7863.patch, LUCENE-7863.patch,
> LUCENE-7863.patch, LUCENE-7863.patch, LUCENE-7863.patch, LUCENE-7863.patch,
> LUCENE-7863.patch, LUCENE-7863.patch
>
>
> h2. Context
> \*suffix and \*infix\* searches on large indexes.
> h2. Problem
> Obviously applying {{ReversedWildcardFilter}} doubles an index size, and I'm
> shuddering to think about EdgeNGrams...
> h2. Proposal
> _DRY_
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
