Siiigggh. Yet another "brilliant" idea bites the dust.
Thanks!
Erick
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Erick Erickson
> wrote:
> > Yonik:
> >
> > Of course I'm not really up on the details of sorting, but aren't there
> > various control s
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Yonik:
>
> Of course I'm not really up on the details of sorting, but aren't there
> various control structures that are allocated for a sort but not for
> scoring? I'm thinking of long[maxDoc] type structures in addition to
> the actual val
Yonik:
Of course I'm not really up on the details of sorting, but aren't there
various control structures that are allocated for a sort but not for
scoring? I'm thinking of long[maxDoc] type structures in addition to
the actual values in the FieldCache.
I've been thinking about docValues for this
For a reasonable top-N, the space efficiency should still be the same
as it is really just dominated by the FieldCache representation (is it
in-memory or disk-docvalue based). Directly sorting on that numeric
field vs deriving a score from the field and sorting on that shouldn't
really be that dif
Hi Erick,
I like your idea, FWIW please also leave room for boost by function query which
takes many numeric fields as input but results in a single value. I don't know
if this counts as a really clever function but here's one that I currently use:
{!boost
b=pow(sum(log(sum(product(boosted,90
