Hi, Thanks very much for the confirmation! Yes, I will try to test more to find out. On the face value what I tried to index is pretty simple and I just used default merge policy (final merge time actually not very different between 3.6 and 4.3).
But surely I can miss sth simple, will try to find out. Best regards, Lisheng -----Original Message----- From: Nicolas Guyot [mailto:sfni...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 1:36 PM To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: lucene 4.3 seems to be much slower in indexing than lucene 3.6? Hi Lisheng, first of all, on all my test cases, i can assure you lucene 4.3 is way more efficient than 3.6. Well after understanding and tweaking a few things ;) second can you help us understanding what is indexed and how? like what kind of fields? which merge policy ?... Thanks, Nicolas On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Zhang, Lisheng < lisheng.zh...@broadvision.com> wrote: > ** > > Hi, > > I did some basic performance testing, just use random number to generate > text for indexing, > below I attached source java code. The command I used are: > > java TestReal43 index -docCount 500 -start 1 -optimize true -luceneDir mmap > java TestReal36 index -docCount 500 -start 1 -optimize true -luceneDir mmap > > The difference is NOT in optimization, I changed directory within (Simple, > MMap, NIOFS), > it does not make much difference, 43 is about 30~40% slower. I conducted > test in Linux: > > Linux ec2usevmsstgamq 3.2.0-49-virtual #75-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jun 18 17:59:38 > UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > Thanks very much for helps, Lisheng > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
