Maybe commongrams could help this but it boils down to speed/quality/cheap. Choose two. Thanks
> On Apr 1, 2017, at 10:28 AM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > >> On 3/31/2017 1:55 PM, David Hastings wrote: >> So I un-commented out the line, to enable it to go against 6 important >> fields. Afterwards through monitoring performance I noticed that my >> searches were taking roughly 50% to 100% (2x!) longer, and it started >> at the exact time I committed that change, 1:40 pm, qtimes below in a >> 15 minute average cycle with the start time listed. > > That is fully expected. Using both pf and qf basically has Solr doing > the exact same queries twice, once as specified on fields in qf, then > again as a phrase query on fields in pf. If you add pf2 and/or pf3, you > can expect further speed drops. > > If you're sorting by relevancy, using pf with higher boosts than qf > generally will make your results better, but it comes at a cost in > performance. > > Thanks, > Shawn >
