@Olly : Sir, got your point about caching. I will definitely go for fully implementing a replacement of QueryParser and get it merged . Will make sure all the features that the current QueryParser supports, work better or at least that best in the replacement along with the extra features like spelling suggestion and improvement of parsed form of real world queries with the help of examples given in queryparsertest.cc as you mentioned in your earlier mail. <div>
Will not go for partially this and partially that. </div><div><br></div><div>@Dan : Sir, as discussed with Olly sir, I agree that we should not get into result caching. As the name of the topic itself mentions "QueryParser Re-implementation ", I would definitely go for re-implementation rather than adding to the existing implementation. As you rightfully mentioned, will take into account how muck time simply re-implementing the query parser will take in my proposal.</div>
<div>And since we are not doing caching any longer, so those patents are of no use and will not be referred to.</div><div><br></div><div>Will come up with the proposal and will let you know so that with the help of your suggestions, I can improve the basic proposal that I come up with.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Sehaj <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Olly Betts <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:olly@survex.com">olly@survex.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 09:27:19PM +0530, Sehaj Singh Kalra wrote:<br>
> I have a question - Does Xapian at present cache the result at any level ?<br>
> If not, then I can add the functionality of caching ("after" the Query has<br>
> been parsed as you rightfully explained that it's probably better to cache<br>
> after the QueryParser) in my proposal.<br>
<br>
</div>Xapian doesn't explicitly cache results between queries, though the<br>
operating system will cache recently read disk blocks, which makes a<br>
big difference - if you turn on the machine and time running the same<br>
query twice in a row, it'll be much faster the second time, entirely<br>
due to this.<br>
<br>
Make sure you don't bite off too much though - it would be better to<br>
fully implement a replacement QueryParser and get it merged than to<br>
partly implement a replacement QueryParser and partly implement a query<br>
result cache. The current QueryParser supports quite a lot of features<br>
and those all need to work at least as well in the replacement as they<br>
do currently before we can make the switch.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Olly<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>