Doug Cutting wrote:
Daniel Noll wrote:
Timings were obtained by performing the same search 1,000 times and
averaging the total time. This was then performed five times in a row
to get the range that's displayed below. Memory usage was obtained
using a 20-second sleep after loading the index, and then using the
Windows task manager to see the memory usage 10 seconds into the sleep
(the garbage collector tends to free up some memory during the first
few seconds of the sleep.)
Timings for a simple TermQuery on the term "one" (docFreq = 22):
I would be cautious about concluding too much from a single term,
since you may get lucky and pick a term that is close to the index
point. Rather you should average timings over a number of terms,
randomly ordered. If you wish to remove i/o times, then don't time
the first iteration. Does that make sense?
I actually did throw a lot of terms in, and eventually chose "one" for
the tests because it was the slowest query to complete of them all
(hence I figured it was already spending some fairly long time in I/O,
and would be penalised the most.) Every other query was around 7ms
before tweaking, and the tweak increased them all to somewhere around
10ms but that's still a lot faster than "one" was even at its fastest.
Daniel
--
Daniel Noll
NUIX Pty Ltd
Level 8, 143 York Street, Sydney 2000
Phone: (02) 9283 9010
Fax: (02) 9283 9020
This message is intended only for the named recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
message or attachment is strictly prohibited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
