Merge lp:~lifeless/launchpad/malone into lp:launchpad
| Status: | Merged | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Approved by: | Michael Hudson-Doyle on 2010-07-25 | ||||
| Approved revision: | no longer in the source branch. | ||||
| Merged at revision: | 11277 | ||||
| Proposed branch: | lp:~lifeless/launchpad/malone | ||||
| Merge into: | lp:launchpad | ||||
| Diff against target: |
525 lines (+107/-69) 15 files modified
lib/canonical/database/nl_search.py (+19/-8) lib/canonical/launchpad/doc/textsearching.txt (+17/-9) lib/lp/answers/doc/emailinterface.txt.disabled (+1/-1) lib/lp/answers/doc/faq-vocabulary.txt (+2/-2) lib/lp/answers/doc/faqtarget.txt (+0/-1) lib/lp/answers/doc/questiontarget.txt (+0/-4) lib/lp/answers/stories/project-add-question.txt (+1/-1) lib/lp/answers/stories/question-add-in-other-languages.txt (+12/-4) lib/lp/answers/stories/question-add.txt (+10/-1) lib/lp/answers/stories/this-is-a-faq.txt (+23/-8) lib/lp/bugs/doc/bugtask-find-similar.txt (+8/-5) lib/lp/bugs/doc/bugtask.txt (+0/-10) lib/lp/bugs/stories/guided-filebug/xx-distro-guided-filebug.txt (+5/-1) lib/lp/bugs/stories/guided-filebug/xx-product-guided-filebug.txt (+3/-3) lib/lp/bugs/stories/guided-filebug/xx-sorting-by-relevance.txt (+6/-11) |
||||
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~lifeless/launchpad/malone | ||||
| Related bugs: |
|
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tim Penhey (community) | Approve on 2010-08-02 | ||
| Michael Hudson-Doyle | 2010-07-25 | Approve on 2010-07-25 | |
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Description of the Change
Further improve the performance of bug duplicate detection by switching from | (any term matches) to & (all terms must match), with an expansion to handle one missing term.
This reduces over 90% of the overhead in tests so far, taking a 8second operation(on staging) down to 800msec.
I'm putting this up for review now to get feedback on the changes; I'm going to spin it up on staging and see if it delivers what it looks like it promises.
| Robert Collins (lifeless) wrote : | # |
I will file a bug and reference before landing.
| Tim Penhey (thumper) wrote : | # |
u'(firefox&
Why have the (firefox&
It will be covered by the other three.
| Robert Collins (lifeless) wrote : | # |
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Tim Penhey <email address hidden> wrote:
> u'(firefox&
>
> Why have the (firefox&
>
> It will be covered by the other three.
Ideally we'd iterate over the f&f&s, then the other terms, and expand
further. As for why, here - the same phrase is overloaded and used for
ranking, which means we do want the semantic statement as much/more
than the baseline work.
-Rob
| Tim Penhey (thumper) wrote : | # |
Changes look fine, although I'd love to see the doctest rewritten so it doesn't use sample data.

Is there a bug or spec you can reference in the XXX comments about introducing a better search? Otherwise it's fine.