[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12466176
]
Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-114:
-----------------------------------
tested on an AMD opteron, 64 bit mode, Java5 -server -Xbatch and exists() was
8.5% faster, intersectionSize() was 7% faster.
I didn't bother testing union(), andNot(), as they are obviously going to be
much faster.
> HashDocSet new hash(), andNot(), union()
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-114
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-114
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: search
> Reporter: Yonik Seeley
> Attachments: hashdocset.patch, test.patch
>
>
> Looking at the negative filters stuff, I realized that andNot() had no
> optimized implementation for HashDocSet, so I implemented that and union().
> While I was in there, I did a re-analysis of hash collision rates and came up
> with a cool new hash method that goes directly into a linear scan and is
> hence simpler, faster, and has fewer collisions.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
