On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 6:51 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I didn't really follow that thread either - but we didn't move to the new > Comp Api because of it's perfomance vs the old.
We did (LUCENE-1483), but those perf tests mixed in a number of other improvements (eg, searching by segment avoids the 2nd pass of MultiTermDocs.read(int[], int[]), whereas John's tests more specifically test the perf difference between single-PQ vs multi-PQ-then-merge (much simpler comparator API). So we are re-scrutinizing that difference... and if the perf gains are minimal or non-existent I think we should still consider going back to the simpler API. I'm working now to set up a full benchmark across real (wikipedia) / synthetic source, different queries, different sorts, balanced vs unbalanced segment sizes, etc. Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
