Use weighted array instead of bitvector when imported filter attribute (MERGEOK) #33177
+101
−25
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
has few hits. If lid space is 80M, and we estimate 100 hits then a bitvector will use 10MB while a weighted array will use 800 bytes. Always using bitvectors can be a problem when we have queries with many terms (e.g. queries using weightedset operator with 1000 or more terms).
geirst
approved these changes
Jan 24, 2025
geirst
changed the title
geirst
deleted the
toregge/use-weighted-array-instead-of-bitvector-when-imported-filter-attribute-has-few-hits
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
has few hits.
If lid space is 80M, and we estimate 100 hits then a bitvector will use 10MB while a weighted array will use 800 bytes.
Always using bitvectors can be a problem when we have queries with many terms (e.g. queries using weightedset operator with 1000 or more terms).
@geirst : please review
@vekterli, @arnej27959 : FYI