Kranti, The range query also looks like a good candidate to be moved to a filter query so it can be cached.
Joel Bernstein Search Engineer at Heliosearch On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Smiley, David W. <dsmi...@mitre.org> wrote: > Kranti, > > I can't speak to the specific slow-down while grouping, but if you expect > to run [* TO *] queries with any frequency then you should index a boolean > flag and query for that instead. You might also reduce the precisionStep > value for the field you are using to 6 or even 4. But wow that's a big > difference you noted; it wouldn't hurt to double-check with the debugger > that the [* TO *] is treated as a numeric range query instead of a generic > term range. > > ~ David > ________________________________________ > From: Kranti Parisa [kranti.par...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 10:26 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Range queries with Grouping is slow? > > Is there any known issue with Range queries + grouping? > > Case1: > q=id:123&group=true&sort=price > asc&group.field=entityId&group.limit=2&group.ngroups=true > > Case2: > q=id:123 AND price:[* TO *]&group=true&sort=price > asc&group.field=entityId&group.limit=2&group.ngroups=true > > Index Size:10M/~5GB > After running both queries at least once, I was expecting to hit the query > caches and response should be quick enough, but > Case1: 15-20ms (looks fine) > Case2: 400+ms (this seems constantly >400ms even after the first query) > > any thought? if it's a known issue, please point me to the jira link > otherwise I can open an issue if this needs some analysis? > > > Thanks, > Kranti K. Parisa > http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa >
