[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4872?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13614475#comment-13614475
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-4872:
--------------------------------------------
bq. What about your own great work
(http://blog.mikemccandless.com/2013/02/drill-sideways-faceting-with-lucene.html)
as a use-case to start with?
Thank Stefan :) That's sort of a specialized (but very useful) use case I
think ... and the minShouldMatch is always N-1.
bq. Maybe some consulting committers can also share some insight on how this is
used in the wild.
+1, that'd be great to know!
> BooleanWeight should decide how to execute minNrShouldMatch
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4872
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4872
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: core/search
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 5.0, 4.3
>
> Attachments: crazyMinShouldMatch.tasks
>
>
> LUCENE-4571 adds a dedicated document-at-time scorer for minNrShouldMatch
> which can use advance() behind the scenes.
> In cases where you have some really common terms and some rare ones this can
> be a huge performance improvement.
> On the other hand BooleanScorer might still be faster in some cases.
> We should think about what the logic should be here: one simple thing to do
> is to always use the new scorer when minShouldMatch is set: thats where i'm
> leaning.
> But maybe we could have a smarter heuristic too, perhaps based on cost()
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
