[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9211?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17113384#comment-17113384
]
Viral Gandhi commented on LUCENE-9211:
--------------------------------------
This improvement had a negative impact on our internal benchmarking when we
tried to upgrade to Lucene 8.5.1. I have created an issue regarding that -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9378.
> Adding compression to BinaryDocValues storage
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9211
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9211
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/codecs
> Reporter: Mark Harwood
> Assignee: Mark Harwood
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 8.5
>
> Time Spent: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> While SortedSetDocValues can be used today to store identical values in a
> compact form this is not effective for data with many unique values.
> The proposal is that BinaryDocValues should be stored in LZ4 compressed
> blocks which can dramatically reduce disk storage costs in many cases. The
> proposal is blocks of a number of documents are stored as a single compressed
> blob along with metadata that records offsets where the original document
> values can be found in the uncompressed content.
> There's a trade-off here between efficient compression (more docs-per-block =
> better compression) and fast retrieval times (fewer docs-per-block = faster
> read access for single values). A fixed block size of 32 docs seems like it
> would be a reasonable compromise for most scenarios.
> A PR is up for review here [https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1234]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
