From: Pierrick B. <pie...@cu...> - 2007-05-02 09:28:26
|
Hi, Michael Beddow a écrit : > I think Bruno meant FLOWR expressions *performance* rather than support, It would have been better to make it clear then :-) Never mind. > and > I also suspect that a big area for performance improvements in where clauses > concerns sorting. So... in order by clauses ;-) Well, don't expect anything really new in this area (except, erm, when you want to sort... empty sequences). We have proposed this improvement as an "idea" for Google SoC (http://exist.sourceforge.net/summer.html#N102BE) and only one student has applied for it (although it wasn't such a difficult task IMHO). Unfortunately, he didn't look very motivated and the 2 "slots" allocated by Google went to other students as you already know. However, our new modular indexing stuff could greatly ease the development of index-driven sorts. We still have some details to sort out (like the hierarchy in which we - and any contributor - should put them) and I will post a HOWTO relying on one of my use cases probably by mid-june. I also plan to ask Akhil, our Google SoC student, to move the fulltext-index to the new architecture (if Wolfgang hasn't done so before). With at least 3 real examples of such indexes and of the way they could be used, I hope we'll get more contributions to the project. I also remind that we can expect a major performance boost on some of our queries. That should make things faster even though sorting is as slow as before :-) Cheers, -- Pierrick Brihaye, informaticien Service régional de l'Inventaire / DRAC Bretagne mailto:pie...@cu... / tél : +33 (0)2 99 29 67 78 Avez-vous lu http://usenet-fr.news.eu.org/fr-chartes/rfc1855.html ? |