On Jun 1, 2005, at 6:07 PM, Daniel Naber wrote:
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 04:41, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
http://www.zedshaw.com/projects/ruby_odeum/performance.html
Here's a follow up:
http://www.zedshaw.com/projects/ruby_odeum/odeum_lucene_part2.html
Now the claim is that Lucene is faster than Ruby/Odeum but it takes 36
times more memory. However, I cannot find any information on how
exactly
Lucene was started. It's no surprise that Java requires much memory
and
doesn't clean up if it never comes close to the limit set with -Xmx.
I went around several times in e-mail with Zed, the author of this
comparison after his follow-up. His paraphrasing of me in there is
only partially sort of what I said to him. He's instantiating an
IndexSearcher inside a tight loop which I told him was a very bad
thing to do with Lucene and that his loops are so tight that garbage
collection isn't getting a chance to kick in. He doesn't currently
believe some of this from me, and also feels that adjusting the code
to make Lucene happy is being unfair.
I wish the RubyLucene folks would hurry up and get a port over there
so that we could compare against Ruby/Odeum "fairly" :)
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
