[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-937?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12507089
 ] 

Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-937:
--------------------------------------

> This patch should not go through as is. What do you think given these 
> results? I assumed that an ArrayList would be faster as all of the data 
> is guaranteed contiguous, but it surprised me that the resizing was not 
> enough to slow things down to LinkedList speed (unless you start with 
> too low an initial size -- default is 10).

I think an ArrayList also has higher initialization costs. Your test
actually tests the performance for a single document. It would be 
interesting to know how the different implementations perform when you 
run the tests with more than one document. I would think that LinkedList() 
is probably better if you have lots of very small documents, whereas
ArrayList(30) is faster if you have bigger docs with lots of Tokens.



> Make CachingTokenFilter faster
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-937
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-937
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Mark Miller
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: CachingTokenFilter.patch
>
>
> The wrong data structure was used for the CachingTokenFilter. It should be an 
> ArrayList rather than a LinkedList. There is a noticeable difference in speed.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to