Thanks David, that does indeed sound like it'll help. Is there an issue number
I can use to track development\availability?Eric.
> From: dsmi...@mitre.org
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Solr 4.0 - Join performance
> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:15:27 +0000
>
> Stepping back a bit, the reason you are using multiple cores with a join is
> because Solr doesn't have a multi-valued numeric range type. The spatial
> work I'm doing in Lucene-spatial does, and it's 2-dimensional for an x & y
> whereas your case calls for one dimension. It's taking a bit of time, but
> when finished you should be able to use it for your use case ignoring the
> 'y'. Eventually I'd like to develop such a Solr field type for a
> numeric/time range to do it more natively but that's a ways off.
>
> Cheers,
> ~ David Smiley
>
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 10:45 AM, Eric Khoury wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> >
> >
> > I’m testing out the new join feature, hitting some perf
> > issues, as described in Erick’s article
> > (http://architects.dzone.com/articles/solr-experimenting-join).
> >
> > Basically, I’m using 2 objects in solr (this is a simplified
> > view):
> >
> >
> >
> > Item
> >
> > - Id
> >
> > - Name
> >
> >
> >
> > Grant
> >
> > - ItemId
> >
> > - AvailabilityStartTime
> >
> > - AvailabilityEndTime
> >
> >
> >
> > Each item can have multiple grants attached to it.
> >
> >
> >
> > The query I'm using is the following, to find items by
> > name, filtered by grants availability window:
> >
> >
> >
> > solr/select?fq=Name:XXX&q={!join
> > from=ItemId to=Id} AvailabilityStartTime:[* TO NOW] AND
> > -AvailabilityEndTime:[*
> > TO NOW]
> >
> >
> >
> > With a hundred thousand items, this query can take multiple seconds
> > to perform, due to the large number or ItemIds returned from the join query.
> >
> > Has anyone come up with a better way to use joins for these types of
> > queries? Are there improvements planned in 4.0 rtm in this area?
> >
> >
> >
> > Btw, I’ve explored simply adding Start-End times to items, but
> > the flat data model makes it hard to maintain start-end pairs.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the help!
> >
> > Eric.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
