+1 for a pull request Thanks
Michael Am 27.04.23 um 20:53 schrieb Ishan Chattopadhyaya:
+1, please contribute to Lucene. Thanks! On Thu, 27 Apr, 2023, 10:59 pm Jonathan Ellis, <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi all, I've created an HNSW index implementation that allows for concurrent build and querying. On my i9-12900 (8 performance cores and 8 efficiency) I get a bit less than 10x speedup of wall clock time for building and querying the "siftsmall" and "sift" datasets from http://corpus-texmex.irisa.fr/. The small dataset is 10k vectors while the large is 1M. This speedup feels pretty good for a data structure that isn't completely parallelizable, and it's good to see that it's consistent as the dataset gets larger. The concurrent classes achieve identical recall compared to the non-concurrent versions within my ability to test it, and are drop-in replacements for OnHeapHnswGraph and HnswGraphBuilder; I use threadlocals to work around the places where the existing API assumes no concurrency. The concurrent classes also pass the existing test suite with the exception of the ram usage ones; the estimator doesn't know about AtomicReference etc. (Big thanks to Michael Sokolov for testAknnDiverse which made it much easier to track down subtle problems!) My motivation is 1. It is faster to query a single on-heap hnsw index, than to query multiple such indexes and combine the result. 2. Even with some contention necessarily occurring during building of the index, we still come out way ahead in terms of total efficiency vs creating per-thread indexes and combining them, since combining such indexes boils down to "pick the largest and then add all the other nodes normally," you don't really benefit from having computed the others previously. I am currently adding this to Cassandra as code in our repo, but my preference would be to upstream it. Is Lucene open to a pull request?-- Jonathan Ellisco-founder, http://www.datastax.com @spyced
