On Thursday 08 September 2005 23:17, Doug Cutting wrote: > I don't in general disagree with this sort of optimization, but I think > a good fix is a bit more complicated than what you posted. > > Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > And here comes the fixes: > > ... > > > There is significant time improvement for writing and slight for > > reading. I also recommend set the buffer to 8 or 16 kilobytes. > > In certain cases Lucene allocates many stream buffers. Making these > larger can thus greatly increase the amount of memory used. Also, the > filesystem should optimize sequential reads so that the primary > improvement seen with a larger buffer size is fewer system calls. In my > experience, a buffer of 1k or so is usually large enough so that the > system call overheads are minimal. > I suppose one of these cases are when many terms are used in a query. Would it be easily possible to make the buffer size for a term iterator depend on the numbers of documents to be iterated? Many terms only occur in a few documents, so this could be a nice win on total buffer size for the many terms case.
Regards, Paul Elschot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
