Good!

In fact now we see similar slowness with nio-thread vs nio-shared as we see for RAM-thread vs RAM-shared. Ie, for both RAM and NIO you get better performance sharing a single reader than reader-per-thread. This is odd -- I would have expected that with infinite RAM reader-per- thread would always be as fast or faster than a shared reader. It's particularly interesting that the RAM case shows it worse than the NIO case.

Maybe it's because in the reader-per-thread case the CPU's cache is less effective since things like norms & deleted docs are now replicated in memory?

Mike

Dmitri Bichko wrote:

Nice!

At 8 threads nio-shared catches up with ram-shared. Here's the complete table:

        fs-thread       nio-thread      ram-thread      fs-shared       
nio-shared      ram-shared
1       71877   70461   54739   73986   72155   61595
2       34949   34945   26735   43719   33019   28935
3       25581   28732   26885   38412   23383   19624
4       20511   21235   31742   38712   18000   15059
5       19235   21060   24345   39685   14636   12509
6       16775   17685   26896   39592   12649   10841
7       17147   18766   18296   46678   11201   10183
8       18327   17588   19043   39886   10439   10048
9       16885   16483   18721   40342   9455    9483
10      17832   17428   30757   44706   8947    10975
11      17251   16405   21199   39947   8597    9704
12      17267   17967   36284   40208   8462    10996

And it behaves very well with more threads:

        nio-shared
1       71066
2       33206
3       22824
4       18168
5       15198
6       13086
7       11616
8       10698
9       9919
10      9657
11      9409
12      8977
13      9210
14      8757
15      9282
16      9260
17      9010
18      8230
19      8439
20      8486
21      8631
22      8417
23      8154
24      8685
25      7878
26      8398
27      8265
28      8266
29      7951
30      8606
31      8385
32      8630

That solves it for me, but I do see a fair amount of free time on this
machine - if there are other things you want to benchmark, I'd be
happy to do it.

Cheers,
Dmitri

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark Miller wrote:

Thats a good point, and points out a bug in solr trunk for me. Frankly I don't see how its done. There is no code I can see/find to use it rather than FSDirectory. Still assuming there must be a way, but I don't see it...

Ah - brain freeze. What else is new :) You have to set the system property
to change implementations: org.apache.lucene.FSDirectory.class is the
property, set it to the class. Been a long time...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to