my maxBufferedDocs  is 1000, do you recommend bigger than that? What's
a good number for this for a very high indexing rate (10K new
documents every min).


On Jan 19, 2008 10:30 PM, Otis Gospodnetic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In addition to what Mike already said:
>
> maxMergeDocs=99999 -- do you really mean maxMergeDocs and not maxBufferedDocs?
>
> Larg(er) maxBufferedDocs will speed up indexing.
>
> Otis
>
> --
> Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: vivek sar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 4:31:26 AM
> Subject: Optimize for large index size
>
> Hi,
>
>   We are using Lucene 2.2. We have an index of size 70G (within 3-4
> days) and growing. We run optimize pretty frequently (once every hour
> - due to large number of index updates every min - can be up to 100K
> new documents every min). I have seen every now and then the optimize
> takes 3-4 hours to complete and up to 8 G memory (our limit). This
> makes the whole system slow. Few questions,
>
> 1) Is there any alternative to optimize? That is, can we do without
> optimize and still have our search fast?
> 2) What's the best way to use optimize, i.e. how can we make the
> optimize much faster and use lesser memory?
> 3) Is there a way to partition the indexes using Lucene? Let's say we
> partition daily, so we have to optimize only the daily indexes and not
> the whole thing.
>
> Our mergefactor=200 and maxMergeDocs=99999
>
> Thanks,
> -vivek
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to