>
> 2) Because all your clauses are more like filters and are ANDed together,
> you'll likely get better performance by putting them _each_ in an fq
> E.g.
> fq=product_identifier_type:DOTCOM_OFFER
> fq=abstract_or_primary_product_id:[* TO *]
why is this the case? is it just better to have no logic operators in the
filter queries?
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Josh Lincoln <josh.linc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Suresh,
> Two things I noticed.
> 1) If your intent is to only match records where there's something,
> anything, in abstract_or_primary_product_id, you should use fieldname:[*
> TO
> *] but that will exclude records where that field is empty/missing. If you
> want to match records even if that field is empty/missing, then you should
> remove that clause entirely
> 2) Because all your clauses are more like filters and are ANDed together,
> you'll likely get better performance by putting them _each_ in an fq
> E.g.
> fq=product_identifier_type:DOTCOM_OFFER
> fq=abstract_or_primary_product_id:[* TO *]
> fq=gtin:<numericValue>
> fq=product_class_type:BUNDLE
> fq=hasProduct:N
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:35 PM suresh pendap <sureshfors...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello everybody,
> >
> > We are seeing that the below query is running very slow and taking
> almost 4
> > seconds to finish
> >
> >
> > [<shard7_replica1>] webapp=/solr path=/select
> >
> > params={df=_text_&distrib=false&fl=id&shards.purpose=4&
> start=0&fsv=true&sort=modified_dtm+desc&shard.url=http://
> > <host1>:8983/solr/flat_product_index_shard7_replica1/
> %7Chttp://<host2>:8983/solr/flat_product_index_shard7_
> replica2/%7Chttp://<host3>:8983/solr/flat_product_index_
> shard7_replica0/&rows=11&version=2&q=product_identifier_type:DOTCOM_OFFER+
> AND+abstract_or_primary_product_id:*+AND+(gtin:<
> numericValue>)+AND+-product_class_type:BUNDLE+AND+-hasProduct:N&NOW=
> 1504196301534&isShard=true&timeAllowed=25000&wt=javabin}
> > hits=0 status=0 QTime=3663
> >
> >
> > It seems like the abstract_or_primary_product_id:* clause is
> contributing
> > to the overall response time. It seems that the
> > abstract_or_primary_product_id:* . clause is not adding any value in the
> > query criteria and can be safely removed. Is my understanding correct?
> >
> > I would like to know if the order of the clauses in the AND query would
> > affect the response time of the query?
> >
> > For e.g . f1: 3 AND f2:10 AND f3:* vs . f3:* AND f1:3 AND f2:10
> >
> > Doesn't Lucene/Solr pick up the optimal query execution plan?
> >
> > Is there anyway to look at the query execution plan generated by Lucene?
> >
> > Regards
> > Suresh
> >
>
