5 ms·
If you held a gun to my head and forced me to make a guess I'd say you could push that approach to order of 100K, maybe 1M documents. If sqlite had a generic "
by marginalia_nu 1y ago
If you held a gun to my head and forced me to make a guess I'd say you could push that approach to order of 100K, maybe 1M documents.
If sqlite had a generic "strictly ascending sequence of integers" type[1] and would optimize around that, you could probably push it farther in terms of implementing efficient inverted indexes.
[1] primary key tables aren't really useful here.
- radiator 1y agoFrom my experience, SQLite's FTS5 is orders of magnitude more performant than that, i.e. for 100K documents, 7 queries/second on some of the cheapest 1 vCPU Virtual Machines. But it is true that a specialized search engine using a more clever algorithm might be another order of magnitude faster.
- luizfelberti 1y ago> If sqlite had a generic "strictly ascending sequence of integers" type Is that not what WITHOUT ROWID does? My understanding is that it's precisely meant to physically cluster data in the underlying B-Tree If that is not what you meant, could you elaborate on the "primary key tables aren't really useful here" footnote?