jpountz commented on PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#issuecomment-2498257183
Thank you!
--
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 unsub
jpountz merged PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989
--
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
jfboeuf commented on code in PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#discussion_r1855164834
##
lucene/core/src/test/org/apache/lucene/store/TestBufferedChecksum.java:
##
@@ -63,4 +67,127 @@ public void testRandom() {
}
assertEquals(c1.getValue(), c2
jfboeuf commented on code in PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#discussion_r1855164624
##
lucene/core/src/test/org/apache/lucene/store/TestBufferedChecksum.java:
##
@@ -63,4 +67,127 @@ public void testRandom() {
}
assertEquals(c1.getValue(), c2
jpountz commented on code in PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#discussion_r1854638074
##
lucene/core/src/test/org/apache/lucene/store/TestBufferedChecksum.java:
##
@@ -63,4 +67,127 @@ public void testRandom() {
}
assertEquals(c1.getValue(), c2
jfboeuf commented on code in PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#discussion_r1840804892
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/store/BufferedChecksum.java:
##
@@ -60,6 +64,37 @@ public void update(byte[] b, int off, int len) {
}
}
+ void upd
jpountz commented on code in PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#discussion_r1839685981
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/store/BufferedChecksum.java:
##
@@ -60,6 +64,37 @@ public void update(byte[] b, int off, int len) {
}
}
+ void upd
jfboeuf commented on PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#issuecomment-2471157022
@jpountz
[I modified the benchmark to make it more realistic by adding a header to
the `IndexOutput`
](https://github.com/apache/lucene/commit/8dc6eac23b3a1158ef4c82860d8574c779bad04
rmuir commented on PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#issuecomment-2471135059
OK, I see @jfboeuf, thank you for the explanation. My only concern with
with the optimization is testing. If there is a bug here, the user will get
CorruptIndexException.
Could we
jpountz commented on PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#issuecomment-2470814754
The change makes sense to me and looks like it could speed up loading live
docs.
> The benchmark shows the single-long approach performs better on small
arrays. [...] It can be im
jfboeuf commented on PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#issuecomment-2470657083
Thank you for your feedback. Perhaps I misunderstood your point, but the
implementation I propose only calls `Checksum.update(byte[])`. The change
resides in how the buffer is fed to avo
rmuir commented on PR #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989#issuecomment-2470068010
This is actually slower, we only want to call `updateBytes(byte[])` or the
checksum calculation is very slow (not vectorized).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service
jfboeuf opened a new pull request, #13989:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13989
Take advantage of the existing buffer in `BufferedChecksum` to speed up
reads for Longs, Ints, Shorts, and Long arrays by avoiding byte-by-byte reads.
Use the faster `readLongs()` method to decode
13 matches
Mail list logo
