Hi
I am trying to run the performance tests against lucene, and am suprised
about the results.
I have a test that creates a queue of queries, and a number of threads.
The threads run concurrently getting the next query available, peforming
a query on the index and taking the top hits. The index is 2GB in size,
and was originally created froma database table of about 7 millions rows.
I ran the test a number of times with 30 threads, and max memory of
3500mb I was processing 10,000 records in about 43 seconds ( 233
queries/second) , the index was stored on a solid state drive running on
a MacBook Pro (2.66 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR). I dont really have a
view on whether this is a good result or not but I was keen to try a few
other things to see if I could improve performance further, but all my
efforts have had minimal effect.
I tried creating a RAMDirectory based on the file index, once the index
had been created (4 min 20 seconds) it again took
I copied the index to a slower external convention hard drive and it
still took 43 seconds.
Reducing/increasing the memory allocated and the number of threads had
minimal impact.
The main thing Im suprised about is I was expecting a massive difference
in holding the index in memory instead on disk
thanks Paul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
