Add this as well: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.155.5030
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Andrzej Bialecki <a...@getopt.org> wrote: > On 08/02/2012 09:17, Ted Dunning wrote: > >> This is true with Lucene as it stands. It would be much faster if there >> were a specialized in-memory index such as is typically used with high >> performance search engines. >> > > This could be implemented in Lucene trunk as a Codec. The challenge though > is to come up with the right data structures. > > There has been some interesting research on optimizations for in-memory > inverted indexes, but it usually involves changing the query evaluation > algos as well - for reference: > > http://digbib.ubka.uni-**karlsruhe.de/volltexte/**documents/1202502<http://digbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/volltexte/documents/1202502> > http://www.siam.org/**proceedings/alenex/2008/alx08_**01transierf.pdf<http://www.siam.org/proceedings/alenex/2008/alx08_01transierf.pdf> > http://research.google.com/**pubs/archive/37365.pdf<http://research.google.com/pubs/archive/37365.pdf> > > -- > Best regards, > Andrzej Bialecki <>< > ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ ______________________________**____ > [__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web > ___|||__|| \| || | Embedded Unix, System Integration > http://www.sigram.com Contact: info at sigram dot com > >
