A strategy for locating documents (e.g., web pages), which are made available over a network (e.g., Internet), includes submitting a search query to a search engine. Some networks include a vast number of documents, such that searching each individual document in response to a search query is not feasible. Accordingly, search engines often include an index of information, which is organized in a manner to enable the search engine to identify documents that might be relevant to the search query. When responding to a search query, analyzing the index can be a cost-consuming service (i.e., can require relatively high amounts of computing resources).
Costs associated with processing information in a search-engine index can depend on various factors. For example, a structure of the index, as well as an amount of information included in the index, can affects costs. In addition, the computing components that are used to analyze the index can affect costs.
A high-level overview of various aspects of the invention are provided here for that reason, to provide an overview of the disclosure and to introduce a selection of concepts that are further described in the detailed-description section below. This summary is not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in isolation to determine the scope of the claimed subject matter. In brief and at a high level, this disclosure describes, among other things, a search-engine index that is leveraged to serve search queries.
Subject matter described herein includes a multi-layer search-engine index. For example, one part of the search-engine index includes a term index, and another part of the search-engine index includes a document index. The term index and the document index might be served using various computing components, such as a solid-state drive.
Illustrative embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below with reference to the attached drawing figures, wherein:
The subject matter of select embodiments of the present invention is described with specificity herein to meet statutory requirements. But the description itself is not intended to define what is regarded as the claimed invention; rather, that is what the claims do. The claimed subject matter might be embodied in other ways to include different steps or combinations of steps similar to the ones described in this document, in conjunction with other present or future technologies. Terms should not be interpreted as implying any particular order among or between various steps herein disclosed unless and except when the order of individual steps is explicitly stated.
As indicated, subject matter described herein includes a multi-layer search-engine index. Accordingly, the search-engine index is divided into multiple indexes, each of which includes a respective set of information used to serve (i.e., respond to) a query. One index includes a term index, which organizes a set of terms that are found among a collection of documents. For example, if 100 documents are available to be searched, a term index organizes each searchable term found among the content of each document. Another index includes a document index, which organizes a set of documents that are searchable. Continuing with the example already given, if 100 documents are available to be searched, a document index might include 100 sets of document-specific information, each set of which describes a respective document. A computing device is used to serve the search-engine index (i.e., to analyze the index when identifying documents relevant to a search query). Accordingly, an exemplary computing device will now be described.
Referring initially to
Embodiments of the invention might be described in the general context of computer code or machine-useable instructions, including computer-executable instructions such as program modules, being executed by a computer or other machine, such as a personal data assistant or other handheld device. Generally, program modules including routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc., refer to code that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Embodiments of the invention might be practiced in a variety of system configurations, including hand-held devices, consumer electronics, general-purpose computers, more specialty computing devices, etc. Embodiments of the invention might also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by remote-processing devices that are linked through a communications network.
With reference to
Computing device 100 typically includes a variety of computer-readable media. Computer-readable media can be any available media that can be accessed by computing device 100 and includes both volatile and nonvolatile media, removable and non-removable media. By way of example, and not limitation, computer-readable media may comprise computer storage media and communication media.
Computer storage media includes volatile and nonvolatile, non-transitory, removable and non-removable media, implemented in any method or technology for storage of information such as computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules or other data. Computer storage media includes RAM; ROM; EEPROM; flash memory or other memory technology; CD-ROM; digital versatile disks (DVD) or other optical disk storage; magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, and magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, each of which can be used to store the desired information and which can be accessed by computing device 100.
Communication media typically embodies computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules or other data in a modulated data signal such as a carrier wave or other transport mechanism and includes any information delivery media. The term “modulated data signal” means a signal that has one or more of its characteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encode information in the signal. By way of example, communication media includes wired media, such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media, such as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media. Combinations of any of the above should also be included within the scope of computer-readable media.
Memory 112 includes computer-storage media in the form of volatile and/or nonvolatile memory. The memory might be removable, nonremovable, or a combination thereof. Exemplary hardware devices include solid-state memory, hard drives, optical-disc drives, etc. Computing device 100 includes one or more processors that read data from various entities such as memory 112 or I/O components 120. Presentation component(s) 116 present data indications to a user or other device. Exemplary presentation components include a display device, speaker, printing component, vibrating component, etc.
I/O ports 118 allow computing device 100 to be logically coupled to other devices including I/O components 120, some of which might be built in. Illustrative components include a microphone, joystick, game pad, satellite dish, scanner, printer, wireless device, etc.
Referring now to
Search engine 214 includes various components that communicate with one another and that enable search engine 214 to deem documents relevant to a search query. For example, search engine 214 includes a plurality of computing devices (i.e., computing device 1, computing device 2 . . . computing device X), each of which processes a respective set of documents.
Matcher 226 identifies a number of documents that are matches to a search query or search term. A “match” is typically determined by the application of a matching algorithm, which takes into account various factors when determining whether a document is a match to a search query. For example, a matching algorithm might take into consideration a number of times a search term appears among content of a document when determining whether the document is a match. Matcher 226 might identify all documents stored on each computing device (i.e., computing devices 1 through X) that include a search term. Alternatively, a match threshold might be established, such that matcher 226 identifies a number of matching documents that does not exceed the match threshold. For example, if a match threshold is five documents, then matcher 226 identifies the top five documents on each computing device that match a search query. While matcher might engage in some estimated-ranking activities, or pre-ranking activities, matcher 226 might not assign any final search-result rankings among those identified matching documents.
Ranker 228 receives an identification of the documents that are deemed matches by matcher 226 and ranks those matching documents among one another. For example, if ranker 228 receives an identification of the top matching documents (e.g., top five documents that are matches), ranker 228 applies a ranking algorithm to determine a respective ranking of each of the top matching documents. A ranking algorithm can take various factors into account, some of which might also be taken into account by matcher 226 and others of which are only evaluated by ranker 228.
As indicated, matcher 226 and ranker 228 do not necessarily review the full content of each document when applying the matching algorithm or the ranking algorithm. Rather, search engine 214 includes indexes of information, which contain only select information that is extracted from each of the documents. The indexes represent condensed versions of the searchable documents and are typically more efficient to analyze, such as with the matching algorithm and the ranking algorithm, than the full text of the documents.
Search engine 214 includes computing device 2 (identified by reference numeral 230), which processes documents 101-200 when serving a search query. For example, computing device 2 determines which of documents 101-200 are deemed relevant to the search query “grocery.” Documents 101-200 are depicted in an exploded view 232, which illustrates various information structures that are used to organize and summarize documents 101-200.
One information structure used to organize documents 101-200 includes a term index 234. Term index 234 is an inverted index including searchable terms found among content of documents 101-200. Term index 234 includes a set of term postings (e.g., “posting list 1,” “posting list 2,” etc.), each of which includes information related to a respective term. The postings might be arranged in various orders, such as alphabetically or by term popularity.
Typically, each term posting includes information that is used to determine whether a document is relevant to (i.e., is a match to) a search query. For example, term posting 236 includes three information sets (i.e., identified by reference numerals 238, 240, and 242), each of which includes information related to a respective document (e.g., webpage) that includes the term “grocery.” Contrary to many term indexes, term index 234 omits certain categories of information, such as position information that indicates locations within each document at which a term can be found. For example, information set 242 does not include any information that would indicate where among document M3 the term “grocery” is found. By omitting certain categories of information, term index 234 is smaller, thereby reducing computing costs associated with matching a search term. Although term posting 236 omits certain categories of information (e.g., position information) that are used by ranker 228 when applying a ranking algorithm, term posting 236 includes other categories of information that are used in a matching algorithm to identify top document matches, such as term frequency (i.e., the number of times a term is found in a document).
In one embodiment, the document identifier might be a delta encoded variable integer, whereas the term frequency is a variable integer. Accordingly, exemplary information might take the following forms when maintained in term index 234:
An alternative encoding mechanism in which the document identifier is interleaved with the term frequency takes into consideration the fact that many term frequencies are below a threshold (e.g., 3). Accordingly, a quantity of bits is reserved to store the encoded document information (i.e., the document identifier and the term frequency). Under this encoding mechanism, when the term frequency is less than a frequency-value threshold (e.g., 3), the quantity of bits is used to encode the term frequency and additional bytes are not used to encode a frequency field. In addition, pursuant to this mechanism, when the term frequency exceeds the frequency-value threshold, additional bytes are used to encode the frequency field. Such an encoding mechanism might allow for a better compression ratio, in exchange for reduced decoding performance. Accordingly, exemplary information might take the following forms when maintained in term index 234 and when a TF field is fixed at 2 bits:
In a further embodiment, blocks might be used to contain a group of occurrences in a posting. For example, a block might be used to contain information sets 238, 240, and 242. In such an embodiment, a value (N) of LSB bits is selected so that most term frequencies in the block are within 2^N−1, and the other term frequencies are appended in an exception list to the beginning or end of the block. In each group, doc indexes are first encoded into VarInt, and then, term frequencies are encoded (2 bits per term frequency) with exceptions.
Based on the encoding mechanisms and omission of ranking information, term index 234 includes a smaller total size, relative to other indexes that include ranking information or use alternative encoding mechanisms. This smaller size allows more documents to be fit into a memory component (e.g., SSD, HDD, etc.) and reduces CPU costs incurred when performing matching operations. In one embodiment, the term index is stored and served together in memory and SSD, thereby leveraging index serve optimization. For example, in-memory/in-buffer caching schema can be applied.
As indicated, information set 242 includes a document identifier that is used to identify information relevant to “Doc M3.” For example, arrow 248 depicts that a document identifier can be looked up in a per-document-index lookup table 250, which maps the document identifier to a location in a per-document index 252 at which document-ranking information is maintained.
Per-document index 252 is organized on a per-document basis, such that each per-document index table categorizes information relevant to a specific document. That is, if computing device 2 230 includes documents 101-200, then per-document index 252 includes a per-document index table for each of the documents included in documents 101-200. Boxes 254, 256, and 258 represent information relevant to documents 101, 167, and 200 (respectively). Each per-document index table includes rich information that is used by ranker 218 to determine a rank of a respective document. That is, ranker 218 plugs information pulled from a per-document index table into a ranking algorithm to determine a rank of a document among search results. Examples of document-ranking information include information that might typically be included in the term index (e.g., position information) but that has been omitted from the term index in order to reduce a size of the term index. In addition, each per-document index table might include information (e.g., a copy of the document itself) that is used to generate a caption or snippet, which is used to represent a document in a search-result list.
Referring now to
An exemplary index header 306 includes current document data (e.g., static rank, length, etc.). In addition, header 306 might include information describing a number of term classes (e.g., Classes 1, 2, and 3) included in a document, as well as other document features, such as language.
Information included in a per-document index also includes an identification of all searchable terms that are included among content of a document. These terms are encoded using a global term-to-WordID mapping 314.
As indicated, the WordID might include one of two variations: fixed mapping (from 318) or hash mapping (from 320). Generally, popular terms receive a WordID that is generated using a fixed mapping approach, such that each term maps to a pre-defined number in a space of [0 . . . 2k−1]. Based on a popularity of the term, either 1 or 2 bytes are used to create a respective WordID. To facilitate quicker search, the mapping might be built into the memory associated with the per-document index. In an exemplary embodiment, the top 255 frequently occurring terms are represented using a 1 byte WordID, and these frequently occurring terms are categorized in term index 312 as Class 1. The next top-64K terms are identified in term index 312 as class 2 terms and are represented by a 2 byte ID. The mapping of terms to WordID of both Class 1 and Class 2 terms might be stored explicitly in memory, using e.g. a hash mapping scheme. Based on these exemplary sizes, and assuming the average term text length is 25 bytes, this mapping table will use approximately 1.6 M bytes of memory.
In a further example, less popular terms are represented by 6 or 8 byte WordIDs (from 320) and are identified in term index 312 as Class 3. For each term in Class 3, the WordID is a hash value of the term text. Assuming a document with an average of 1000 unique terms, the probability of two terms in the document can collide is C (2, 1000)/264=1/245. For 10B doc corpus, the total number of documents with word collisions is roughly 10B/245=0.0003.
Term index 312 is an inverted term index 312, which lists Word IDs of searchable terms that are included among content of the document. Each term posting includes information that is relevant to that respective term as it relates to the document. For example, the highest bit of the posting entry indicates whether there are more than one posting for that term (i.e., whether or not that term is found among content of the document more than once). If the term is only found among content of the document one time, then the posting position is stored in the lower bits of the entry. This scenario is depicted by arrow 324. However, if the term is found among content of the document more than once, then the lower bits of the entry contain a pointer to an overflow array 330 of the posting list. This scenario is depicted by arrow 326.
Overflow array 330 stores the extra posting locations for terms with more than one location among content of a document. The highest bit of each entry is the continuation bit to denote whether the next entry belongs to the current term. If it is 0, then the current entry is the last entry in the term's posting list. Each position entry uses a fixed number of bytes to store the position information, and the size is depending on the total size of the document.
Referring back to
By applying a multi-layer index approach, as described above, multiple queries can be served in parallel. For example, when processing of a first query proceeds from matcher 226 to ranker 228, matching processing of a second query on the same computing device can begin, even though the first query is still being processed by ranker 228. In addition, serving term index 234 and per-document index 304 in SSD allows search engine 214 to leverage performance capabilities of the SSD for more efficient query serving.
Referring now to
Method 410 includes at step 412 receiving by a search engine a search query including a search term. For example, as already described, search-query receiver 224 receives a search query including “grocery” as a search term. Search engine 214 includes term index 234 having multiple postings, and posting 236 includes information relevant to the search term “grocery.”
Step 414 includes reviewing a term posting having information relevant to the search term, wherein the information relevant to the search term includes a document identifier of the document, which includes the search term. For example, posting 236 is reviewed that includes a document identifier of “Doc M3,” which includes the term “grocery” among its contents.
At step 416, the document identifier is used to reference document-ranking information in a per-document index, wherein the document-ranking information is used to assign a search-result rank to the document. For example, arrow 248 represents a document identifier being used to reference document-ranking information. As described above, a document identifier is mapped in lookup table 250 to a location of the document-ranking information in the per-document index.
Pursuant to step 418, search results are served in which a listing of the document is presented consistent with the search-result rank. For example, information 220 is provided to client 212 that includes a search-results webpage. The search-results webpage is generated based on ranking information determined by ranker 228.
Method 410 describes steps for serving a search query. When using a multi-layer search-engine index, as described herein, a query-serving flow can remain similar to that flow that is used with a single index, such as by moving from document matching to ranking estimates to final rankings. However, when the search engine leverages the separate indexes and input/output performance capabilities of the solid-state drive, query-serving performance can be enhanced, such as by executing multiple search queries in parallel.
Referring now to
Method 510 includes at step 512 assigning a document identifier to the document. For example, when Doc M3 of
Pursuant to step 516, the document identifier is encoded together with the frequency to generate encoded document information. The term posting is transformed to include the encoded document information. In addition, step 518 includes storing a set of document-ranking information in a per-document index (separate from the term index). The document-ranking information is used to rank the document when processing the search query. For example, term posting 236 would be updated to include encoded document information in information set 242. Likewise, the per-document index table included in information 256 would store document-ranking information pulled from Doc M3.
The foregoing has described a system of components that is usable to index documents and to service a search-engine query. For example, the system depicted in
Many different arrangements of the various components depicted, as well as components not shown, are possible without departing from the scope of the claims below. Embodiments of our technology have been described with the intent to be illustrative rather than restrictive. Alternative embodiments will become apparent to readers of this disclosure after and because of reading it. Alternative means of implementing the aforementioned can be completed without departing from the scope of the claims below. Certain features and subcombinations are of utility and may be employed without reference to other features and subcombinations and are contemplated within the scope of the claims.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/CN2011/072092 | Mar 2011 | WO | international |
This application is a divisional application of U.S. Ser. No. 13/428,709 (filed on Mar. 23, 2012, and to be issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,959,077), which claims priority to, and the benefit of, PCT/CN2011/072092 (filed Mar. 24, 2011).
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5544352 | Egger | Aug 1996 | A |
5701469 | Brandli et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
6154737 | Inaba et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
7630963 | Larimore et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
20010007987 | Igata | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20050144160 | Doerre et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050198076 | Stata et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060036580 | Stata et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20080059420 | Hsu et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080091666 | Baader et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080140639 | Doerre et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20100145918 | Stata et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100161617 | Cao et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100223421 | Kim et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100306288 | Stein et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100332846 | Bowden et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110040762 | Flatland et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
200602869 | Jan 2006 | TW |
I274264 | Feb 2007 | TW |
200731136 | Aug 2007 | TW |
Entry |
---|
“Office Action dated Oct. 12, 2015 with Search Report dated Oct. 5, 2015, issued in Taiwan Patent Application No. 101110414”, 8 Pages. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Dec. 5, 2013 in U.S. Appl. No. 13/428,709, 16 pages. |
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 8, 2014 in U.S. Appl. No. 13/428,709, 20 pages. |
Dean et al., “MapReduce: Simplified Data Processing on Large Clusters”, In proceeding of Magazine on Communications of the ACM, 50th anniversary issue: 1958-2008, vol. 51, Issue 1, Jan. 2008, pp. 13. |
Martins et al., “Indexing and Ranking in GeoIR Systems”, In ACM Workshop on Geographical Information Retrieval, Nov. 4, 2005, pp. 13. |
Liu et al., “Digging for Gold on the Web: Experience with the WebGather”, In proceeding of The Fourth International Conference on High Performance Computing in the Asia-Pacific Region , May 14-17, 2000, pp. 5. |
Yuwono et al., “Search and Ranking Algorithms for Locating Resources on the World Wide Web”, In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Data Engineering , 1996, pp. 8. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150161265 A1 | Jun 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13428709 | Mar 2012 | US |
Child | 14623022 | US |