Hello.
Thanks for your replay.
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Piotr,
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Piotr Idzikowski
> <piotridzikow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello.
> > I am going to switch to newest (4.10.2) version of Lucene and I'd like to
> > make some optimization in my index and code. I would like to use
> > DocValuesField to get values but also for filtering and sorting. So here
> I
> > have some questions: If I'd like to use range filter
> > (FieldCacheRangeFilter) I need to store a value in XxxDocValuesField, but
> > if i want to use terms filter (FieldCacheTermsFilter) I need to store a
> > value in SortedDocValuesField. So it looks like if I want to use range
> and
> > terms filters I need to have two different fields. Am I right? Am I using
> > it correctly?
>
> FieldCacheRangeFilter and FieldCacheTermsFilter only work well when
> you have lots of terms and most documents match your filter. Otherwise
> you should consider using the regular numeric range filter and terms
> filter. Although they might be a bit slower in the dense case, they
> will be significantly faster when few terms/documents match.
>
So for instance if I store documents with ie creation date and I have a
data (millions of documents) from last let's say 3 years and I'd like to do
range filter to get socs from some month only is it better to use ordinary
numeric query instead of FieldCacheRangeQuery?
>
> Both FieldCacheRangeFilter and FieldCacheTermsFilter would work on the
> same SortedDocValues field. What makes you think you need two fields ?
>
Code:
FieldCacheRangeFilter
*public static FieldCacheRangeFilter<Long> newLongRange(String field,
FieldCache.LongParser parser, Long lowerVal, Long upperVal, boolean
includeLower, boolean includeUpper) {*
* return new FieldCacheRangeFilter<Long>(field, parser, lowerVal,
upperVal, includeLower, includeUpper) {*
* @Override*
* public DocIdSet getDocIdSet(AtomicReaderContext context, Bits
acceptDocs) throws IOException {*
* final long inclusiveLowerPoint, inclusiveUpperPoint;*
* if (lowerVal != null) {*
* long i = lowerVal.longValue();*
* if (!includeLower && i == Long.MAX_VALUE)*
* return null;*
* inclusiveLowerPoint = includeLower ? i : (i + 1L);*
* } else {*
* inclusiveLowerPoint = Long.MIN_VALUE;*
* }*
* if (upperVal != null) {*
* long i = upperVal.longValue();*
* if (!includeUpper && i == Long.MIN_VALUE)*
* return null;*
* inclusiveUpperPoint = includeUpper ? i : (i - 1L);*
* } else {*
* inclusiveUpperPoint = Long.MAX_VALUE;*
* }*
* if (inclusiveLowerPoint > inclusiveUpperPoint)*
* return null;*
* final FieldCache.Longs values =
FieldCache.DEFAULT.getLongs(context.reader(), field,
(FieldCache.LongParser) parser, false);*
* return new FieldCacheDocIdSet(context.reader().maxDoc(),
acceptDocs) {*
* @Override*
* protected boolean matchDoc(int doc) {*
* final long value = values.get(doc);*
* return value >= inclusiveLowerPoint && value <=
inclusiveUpperPoint;*
* }*
* };*
* }*
* };*
* }*
FieldCacheTermsFilter:
*@Override*
* public DocIdSet getDocIdSet(AtomicReaderContext context, Bits
acceptDocs) throws IOException {*
* final SortedDocValues fcsi =
getFieldCache().getTermsIndex(context.reader(), field);*
* final FixedBitSet bits = new FixedBitSet(fcsi.getValueCount());*
* for (int i=0;i<terms.length;i++) {*
* int ord = fcsi.lookupTerm(terms[i]);*
* if (ord >= 0) {*
* bits.set(ord);*
* }*
* }*
Regards
Piotr
