RE: Exception at MultiSearcherThread.hits

2009-07-12 Thread Uwe Schindler
Can you please post the whole Exception, it is missing the type and message. - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -Original Message- > From: Ganesh [mailto:emailg...@yahoo.co.in] > Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 8:06 AM > T

Exception at MultiSearcherThread.hits

2009-07-12 Thread Ganesh
Hello all, I am using Lucene v2.4.1. I am getting following exception while doing search on 4 indexes using ParallelMultiSearcher. org.apache.lucene.search.MultiSearcherThread.hits(ParallelMultiSearcher.java:280) org.apache.lucene.search.ParallelMultiSearcher.search(ParallelMultiSearcher.j

speed of BooleanQueries on 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread eks dev
Is it possible that the same BooleanQuery on 2.9 runs significantly slower than on 2.4? we have some strange effects where the following query runs approx 4(ouch!) times slower on 2.9, test done by 1000 times executing the same Query... But! if I run test from some real Query log with mixed Qu

Re: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread eks dev
-Xms Xms were set to the same value imo, the problem was to convince OS (Win XP) to map huge continuous block... there were no jvm processes running at the same time, just this one... but after killing some desktop processes and restarting machine it worked. hmm, MMapDirectory has support for

RE: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread Uwe Schindler
> > he/lucene/store/MMapDirectory.html#setUseUnmap(boolean) > > > I have tried it already, but it does not help in opening Index... mapping > fails Various other hints: -Xmx and -Xms should be set to the same value, because the mmapped region must map in complete into the available address space

Re: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread eks dev
> he/lucene/store/MMapDirectory.html#setUseUnmap(boolean) I have tried it already, but it does not help in opening Index... mapping fails > > A additional possibility is to use the new > org.apache.lucene.store.FileSwitchDirectory this one is nice, will try it Thanks for tips Uwe. > > >

RE: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread Uwe Schindler
Something other: If you have a tight memory situation and really want to use MMap on 32bit, you should think about using the new support for the Sun JVM hack to "close" MMapped regions: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/core/org/apac he/lucene/store/MMapDirectory.ht

RE: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread Uwe Schindler
It is very hard to find out the exact problematic place in a 32 bit VM, as the smallest change (even a bigger JAR file, more loaded classes, order in opening files,...) can be the cause for this problem. - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@th

Re: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread eks dev
Thanks Uwe, yes it is on 32 bit in extremely tight memory situation. I just was curious what the reason is (on bigger machine it works). Lucene core requires more real memory? Can you please a bit elaborate, can I estimate it somehow? I do not remember seeing any changes that would cause core

RE: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread Uwe Schindler
Is it a 32 or 64 bit JVM? If 32 bit, this error can happen, if the new Lucene Core needs more real memory and so the MMaped address space is already used. MMapDirectory should only be used with 64 bit machines. - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail:

Re: OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread eks dev
Stack trace java.io.IOException: Map failed at sun.nio.ch.FileChannelImpl.map(Unknown Source) at org.apache.lucene.store.MMapDirectory$MMapIndexInput.(Unknown Source) at org.apache.lucene.store.MMapDirectory$MMapIndexInput.(Unknown Source) at org.apache.lucene.store.MMapDirectory.openInput(Un

OOM with 2.9

2009-07-12 Thread eks dev
Hi, We just upgraded to 2.9 and noticed some (to me) not expected OOM. We use MMapDirectory and after upgrade, on exactly the same Index/machine/jvm/params/setup... we cannot start index as mapping screams "No memory" any explanation why this could be the case? ---