[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10299?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17456390#comment-17456390
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-10299:
--------------------------------------
I understand the motivation, I just disagree with it being exposed in the API.
Lucene docids are {{int}}, and this is making a {{set}} of them. I honestly
feel we shouldn't expose {{long}} in the APIs, regardless of our internals. I
feel like {{long}} does not belong in this API.
But again, I suggest we apply the {{int}}-loop workaround first, since it will
fix the practical performance problem. It will make real progress, and it seems
easier than "fixing" the API (assuming we don't want to back out the commit for
now, for some special reason)
> investigate prefix/wildcard perf drop in nightly benchmarks
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-10299
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10299
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Priority: Major
>
> Recently the prefix/wildcard dropped. As these are super simple and not
> impacted by cleanups being done around RegExp, I think instead the
> perf-difference is in the guts of MultiTermQuery where it uses
> DocIdSetBuilder?
> *note that I haven't confirmed this and it is just a suspicion*
> So I think it may be LUCENE-10289 changes? e.g. doing loops with {{long}}
> instead of {{int}} like before, we know these are slower in java.
> I will admit, I'm a bit confused why we made this change since lucene docids
> can only be {{int}}.
> Maybe we get the performance back for free, with JDK18/19 which are
> optimizing loops on {{long}} better? So I'm not arguing that we burn a bunch
> of time to fix this, but just opening the issue.
> cc [~ivera]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
