[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10480?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17562944#comment-17562944
 ] 

Zach Chen commented on LUCENE-10480:
------------------------------------

{quote}maybe there are bits from advance() that we could move to matches() so 
that we would hand it over to the other clause before we start doing expensive 
operations like computing scores.
{quote}
This approach does help stabilizing performance for disjunction within 
conjunction queries (and also provide some small gains)! I have opened a PR for 
it [https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1006] .

> 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
>          Time Spent: 5h 50m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> 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
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to