# Performance degredation between 0.90.5 and 1.4.1 **URL:** \ **Category:** Elasticsearch\ **Created:** [January 14, 2015, 10:10am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/performance-degredation-between-0-90-5-and-1-4-1/21633 "2015-01-14T10:10:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Meidan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/848f3c/32.png) [@Meidan](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Meidan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2015, 10:10am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/performance-degredation-between-0-90-5-and-1-4-1/21633/1 "2015-01-14T10:10:51Z")
Hi, We're in the process of upgrading from 0.90.5 to 1.4.1 and we see a significant performance depredation in one of our queries. A short profiling session shows that the biggest difference is in the "nested native script" part of the query (see attached), which accounted for about 10% of the total search time in 0.90.5, but now it accounts for almost 50% in 1.4.1. Most of that time is spent in org.elasticsearch.search.lookup.DocLookup.get(Object), which in turn calls a lot to org.elasticsearch.index.fielddata.ordinals.SinglePackedOrdinals$Docs.getOrd(int) and the script looks something like this: ``` private Map multipliers; public float runAsFloat() { ScriptDocValues.Strings term = (ScriptDocValues.Strings)doc().get("nested ``` document term"); ScriptDocValues.Doubles strength = (ScriptDocValues.Doubles) doc(). get("nested document term strength"); ``` double score = multipliers.get(term.getValue()) * (1 + strength. ``` getValue()); return (float)score; } Any idea on what changed between 0.90.5 and 1.4.1 that could have caused this? Is there a better way of doing DocLookup that I'm missing? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com). To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/847a79a0-05a5-450c-a4c4-39ceb49cf0e3%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/847a79a0-05a5-450c-a4c4-39ceb49cf0e3%40googlegroups.com). For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout). ---
**Author:** ![warkolm](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/warkolm/32/39224_2.png) [@warkolm](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/warkolm)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2015, 2:53am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/performance-degredation-between-0-90-5-and-1-4-1/21633/2 "2015-01-15T02:53:08Z")
This might be better raised as an issue on github as one of the devs can comment directly on the code you're interested in. On 14 January 2015 at 23:10, Meidan [meidan.alon@gmail.com](mailto:meidan.alon@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi, > > We're in the process of upgrading from 0.90.5 to 1.4.1 and we see a > significant performance depredation in one of our queries. > A short profiling session shows that the biggest difference is in the > "nested native script" part of the query (see attached), which accounted > for about 10% of the total search time in 0.90.5, but now it accounts for > almost 50% in 1.4.1. > Most of that time is spent in > org.elasticsearch.search.lookup.DocLookup.get(Object), which in turn calls > a lot to > org.elasticsearch.index.fielddata.ordinals.SinglePackedOrdinals$Docs.getOrd(int) > and the script looks something like this: > > ``` > private Map multipliers; > public float runAsFloat() { > ScriptDocValues.Strings term = (ScriptDocValues.Strings)doc().get("nested > > ``` > > document term"); > ScriptDocValues.Doubles strength = (ScriptDocValues.Doubles) doc > ().get("nested document term strength"); > > ``` > double score = multipliers.get(term.getValue()) * (1 + strength. > > ``` > > getValue()); > return (float)score; > } > > Any idea on what changed between 0.90.5 and 1.4.1 that could have caused > this? > Is there a better way of doing DocLookup that I'm missing? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "elasticsearch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com). > To view this discussion on the web visit > [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/847a79a0-05a5-450c-a4c4-39ceb49cf0e3%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/847a79a0-05a5-450c-a4c4-39ceb49cf0e3%40googlegroups.com) > [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/847a79a0-05a5-450c-a4c4-39ceb49cf0e3%40googlegroups.com?utm\_medium=email&utm\_source=footer](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/847a79a0-05a5-450c-a4c4-39ceb49cf0e3%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer) > . > For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com](mailto:elasticsearch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com). To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAEYi1X8ifx%3D6NVKOdqj5s\_8ofD3G86SNgFORH3P9f0LzurKaVw%40mail.gmail.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAEYi1X8ifx%3D6NVKOdqj5s_8ofD3G86SNgFORH3P9f0LzurKaVw%40mail.gmail.com). For more options, visit [https://groups.google.com/d/optout](https://groups.google.com/d/optout). ---
**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2017, 12:38am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/performance-degredation-between-0-90-5-and-1-4-1/21633/3 "2017-07-06T00:38:49Z")
Closed on July 6, 2017, 12:38am UTC