[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10480?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17552556#comment-17552556
]
Zach Chen edited comment on LUCENE-10480 at 6/10/22 5:15 AM:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~jpountz] , this issue reminded me of our experiments last year
implementing BMM scorer for pure disjunction, which [showed about 20% ~ 40%
improvement for OrHighHigh and OrHighMed
queries|https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/101#issuecomment-840255508] . Do
you think we should continue to explore in that direction, or there might be
better / simpler algorithms we could look into?
was (Author: zacharymorn):
Hi [~jpountz] , this issue reminded me of our experiments last year
implementing BMM scorer for pure disjunction, which [showed about 20% ~ 40%
improvement for OrHighHigh and OrHighMed
queries|[https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/101#issuecomment-840255508].] Do
you think we should continue to explore in that direction, or there might be
better / simpler algorithms we could look into?
> Specialize 2-clauses disjunctions
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-10480
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10480
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Priority: Minor
>
> WANDScorer is nice, but it also has lots of overhead to maintain its
> invariants: one linked list for the current candidates, one priority queue of
> scorers that are behind, another one for scorers that are ahead. All this
> could be simplified in the 2-clauses case, which feels worth specializing for
> as it's very common that end users enter queries that only have two terms?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
