[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10125?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17422190#comment-17422190
]
Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-10125:
---------------------------------------
I found another change that happened over that period of time that contributed
to the regression. In
https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/107/files#diff-49b11ced76acedf749c5a5a0ff6e7fe93b8fb64caf8697e487a56f4f7adbb510
we moved from write logic in {{DirectWriter}} that was specialized for every
number of bits per value to more general logic that had to work for every
number of bits per value and appears to be slower. I opened a pull request that
restores some of that specialization using the new VarHandles:
https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/327.
> Investigate indexing throughput regression on NYC Taxis between 2021-04-12
> and 2021-05-24
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-10125
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10125
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Assignee: Adrien Grand
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-10125_hack.patch
>
> Time Spent: 3h 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> There's been a significant drop in indexing throughput between 2021-04-12 and
> 2021-05-24 on the NYC Taxis benchmark. Unfortunately several suspects have
> been merged during that period of time so we might need to git bisect to
> figure out which one is responsible for the regression. Interestingly the
> sorted index looks less affected than the non-sorted indexes.
> https://home.apache.org/~mikemccand/lucenebench/sparseResults.html#index_throughput
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
