[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-773?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12708633#action_12708633
]
Uwe Schindler commented on SOLR-773:
------------------------------------
Hi Patrick,
thanks for ding the comparison!
{quote}
As for bench marking, I have performed some recently using tdouble precision 0,
~1 Million docs covering the state of NY
Top density was ~300,000 between Manhattan & Brooklyn area.
{quote}
I wonder, what you mean with precison 0, so what was the precision step? 2, 4
or 8? precisionStep=0 should throw IAE, 64 should do a classical RangeQuery
(enumerating all terms).
bq. And maybe switching the _localTier fields from sdouble to tdouble might
improve that, I haven't tried, 12ms is something I can live with.
I think much faster will not be possible. Even with TrieRange you always have
to visit TermDocs. And something other: as you only return 100 docs, the number
of terms visited may not be so big. The speed improvement of TrieRange is more
visible the more distinct values are in the range.
> Incorporate Local Lucene/Solr
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-773
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-773
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Grant Ingersoll
> Assignee: Grant Ingersoll
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: lucene.tar.gz, SOLR-773-local-lucene.patch,
> SOLR-773-local-lucene.patch, SOLR-773-local-lucene.patch,
> SOLR-773-local-lucene.patch, SOLR-773-local-lucene.patch, SOLR-773.patch,
> SOLR-773.patch, spatial-solr.tar.gz
>
>
> Local Lucene has been donated to the Lucene project. It has some Solr
> components, but we should evaluate how best to incorporate it into Solr.
> See http://lucene.markmail.org/message/orzro22sqdj3wows?q=LocalLucene
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
