vsop-479 commented on PR #12528:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12528#issuecomment-1733041087
@iverase Does it make sense to you if MatchState defined in other class,
such as BKDReader or IntersectVisitor, and only leave the sorted dimension in
IntersectVisitor' visit method as
sylph-eu commented on issue #11507:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/11507#issuecomment-1733118806
Last comment is already a couple of months old, so please let me clarify the
status of this initiative. If there's a chance it's going to be merged? If
there's any blocker or actio
gf2121 opened a new pull request, #12586:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12586
`BufferedUpdates` used to count deleted terms without deduplication to
respect `IndexWriterConfig.setMaxBufferedDeleteTerms`. As
`IndexWriterConfig.setMaxBufferedDeleteTerms` is removed since
[LUCENE
gf2121 commented on code in PR #12586:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12586#discussion_r1335560326
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/index/BufferedUpdates.java:
##
@@ -284,6 +276,13 @@ void
forEachOrdered(DeletedTermConsumer consumer) throw
public long
uschindler commented on issue #11507:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/11507#issuecomment-1733223795
Hi,
actually this issue is already resolved, although the DEFAULT did not change
(and won't change due to performance risks), see here:
https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1
uschindler commented on issue #11507:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/11507#issuecomment-1733230392
@mayya-sharipova: Should we close this issue or are there any plans to also
change the default maximum? I don't think so.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Se
iverase merged PR #12581:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12581
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apa
iverase closed issue #12556: Allow reading binary stored values as DataInput
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/12556
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
iverase commented on PR #12528:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12528#issuecomment-1733441807
My recommendation is to use the following method as you are just trying to
flag if the visit method needs to keep processing points.
```
/** Similar to {@link IntersectVisitor#vi
gf2121 opened a new pull request, #12587:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12587
### Description
Sort terms in TermInSetQuery with radix sort. This helps TermInSetQueries
with a number of terms.
### Benchmark
I made a simple benchmark on sorting `BytesRef[]` wi
jpountz commented on PR #12382:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12382#issuecomment-1733490475
FWIW I ran the benchmark from https://tantivy-search.github.io/bench/ and
also observed a speedup on conjunctions, so I think that the speedup is indeed
real.
--
This is an automated
jpountz merged PR #12382:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12382
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apa
javanna opened a new pull request, #12588:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12588
Until now, LuceneTestCase#newSearcher randomly associates the returned
IndexSearcher instance with an executor that is ad-hoc created, which gets shut
down when the index reader is closed.
Thi
rmuir commented on PR #12588:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12588#issuecomment-1733714024
this is nice, much cleaner. I think i added the original cache-helper-hack.
Just one question: can we reduce the number of threads used? I have 2 cores.
shouldn't 2 be enough to occasional
javanna commented on PR #12588:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12588#issuecomment-1733731499
Thanks @rmuir for looking, I lowered the number of threads
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
UR
jpountz opened a new pull request, #12589:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12589
The idea behind MAXSCORE is to run disjunctions as `+(essentialClause1 ...
essentialClauseM) nonEssentialClause1 ... nonEssentialClauseN`, moving more and
more clauses from the essential list to the
jpountz commented on PR #12589:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12589#issuecomment-1733875246
Opening as a draft as I still need to figure out how to test this
optimization.
I tested on wikibigall where this yielded a good speedup. I would expect an
even better speedup if
javanna merged PR #12588:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12588
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apa
kaivalnp opened a new pull request, #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590
### Context
Vector search is performed in
[`AbstractKnnVectorQuery`](https://github.com/kaivalnp/lucene/blob/main/lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/AbstractKnnVectorQuery.java),
w
benwtrent commented on PR #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590#issuecomment-1734167969
The new KnnCollector abstraction doesn't already address these needs?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub a
kaivalnp commented on PR #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590#issuecomment-1734230703
Thanks for the quick response @benwtrent!
As far as I understand (please let me know if I'm missing something), the
new
[`KnnCollector`](https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/mai
benwtrent commented on PR #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590#issuecomment-1734248507
@kaivalnp I guess you could have a collector that spans all the segments
(created once at the query level).
I am not really against this change, I am just wondering if there is a
kaivalnp commented on PR #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590#issuecomment-1734321355
> you could have a collector that spans all the segments (created once at
the query level).
Interesting, so a single `KnnCollector` passed to all
[`searchNearestVectors`](https:/
benwtrent commented on PR #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590#issuecomment-1734371468
@kaivalnp depends on what you need to do.
You can easily get around all this without any expensive locking.
The collector has a "topDocs" method that could call some higher
kaivalnp commented on PR #12590:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12590#issuecomment-1734432239
> You can easily get around all this without any expensive locking.
> The collector has a "topDocs" method that could call some higher level
collector.
Nice idea! So basically
vsop-479 commented on PR #12528:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12528#issuecomment-1734701754
@iverase Thanks for your recommendation, it may makes code more clear.
I will try to implement it, and run the performance test.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git
26 matches
Mail list logo
