Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add query iterator #309

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 13, 2021
Merged

add query iterator #309

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 13, 2021

Conversation

MXueguang
Copy link
Member

in current version, we added a flag --ordered to the pypi replication to use the query order array.

$ python -m pyserini.search --topics msmarco_passage_dev_subset \
                                             --index msmarco-passage \
                                             --output run.msmarco-passage.txt \
                                             --bm25 --msmarco \
                                             --ordered

@MXueguang MXueguang requested a review from lintool January 9, 2021 23:07
@MXueguang MXueguang marked this pull request as ready for review January 11, 2021 23:18
Copy link
Member

@lintool lintool left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you kill the --ordered option? I can't think of a reason why you wouldn't want ordered?

But otherwise, 🚢 it!

@lintool
Copy link
Member

lintool commented Jan 12, 2021

Hrm, conflicts need to be resolved.

After this gets merged we need to re-do replication numbers.

Actually @MXueguang - one more thing, please document in query_iterator why we actually need to do this - a reference to the GitHub issue should do.

Happy to review it again if you want, but otherwise just merge please.

@lintool
Copy link
Member

lintool commented Jan 12, 2021

We'll also need to rerun multi-threaded search and make sure there are no weird interactions.

@MXueguang
Copy link
Member Author

updated scores in pypi-replication.md

multithreading gives same results

Copy link
Member

@lintool lintool left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants