Thanx a lot Adrien.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Adrien Grand wrote:
> Some minimal information about the fields is loaded into memory when you
> open the index reader. Things like the list of fields and how they are
> indexed.
>
> However the vast majority of the data is read from disk laz
Some minimal information about the fields is loaded into memory when you
open the index reader. Things like the list of fields and how they are
indexed.
However the vast majority of the data is read from disk lazily, we do not
warm the filesystem cache or anything like that by default. We do not u
Hey, thank you so much. I got it.
I have
- 10 lakh docs, 30 fields in my index
- opening new searcher at initial search and
- there will be no filesystem cache for my current index
At initial search, I search across only one field out of 30 fields in my
index.
My question is,
*At init
Regarding whether the filesystem cache helps, you could look at whether
there is some disk activity while your queries are running.
When everything is in the filesystem cache, the latency of search requests
for simple queries (term queries and combinations through boolean queries)
usually mostly d
Hi,
While working with Searcher.Search, I have noticed a difference in
their performance. I have 10 lakh documents and 30 fields in my index. I
have performed three searches using different queries in a sequential
manner. At search time, I used MMapDirectory and index is opened.
*case1: *
ge in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Remote-Searcher-performance-and-Document-retrieval-tf2942459.html#a8228692
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For
On Monday 08 January 2007 23:08, sashaman wrote:
> Can anyone comment on this performance issue?
Have you compared to a local index? It's not uncommon for several doc()
calls to take more time than searching, as doc() requires a lot I/O, even
locally.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnabe
d to make one
remote call to each index for each page of results.
Can anyone comment on this performance issue? Am I doing something wrong, or
there is some other way I can retrieve Documents faster when using a Remote
index?
Thanks,
Alex
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble
pache.org
: To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
: Subject: Searcher performance
:
: What performs best across multiple indexes:
:
:
:
: Each index with an IndexReader with an IndexSearcher on top and the
: searchers linked with a ParallelMultiSearcher
:
:
:
: Or
:
:
:
: Each index with an IndexReader
What performs best across multiple indexes:
Each index with an IndexReader with an IndexSearcher on top and the
searchers linked with a ParallelMultiSearcher
Or
Each index with an IndexReader linked with a MultiReader and an
IndexSearcher on top
Many Thanks
Mike
www.ardentia
10 matches
Mail list logo
