I did that as well. Actually, we had 32 indexes initially. We searched them. It was even horrible. After that I merged them into 4 indexes. And did the same. No gain!
Then, I had to merge 32 indexes into one. On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Anshum <ansh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Prashant, > 8 seconds as the minimum time is a little too much, though considering > you're using just 4G of RAM its still ok. > I would advice you to break your index into smaller indexes, perhaps > selectively query the indexes (if that's possible for your application) and > use a parallelmultisearcher. Its just something that you might try and > like. > All said and done, parallelizing would only get you a bell-curve like > performance graph, so you'd have to figure out the sweet spot there. > > -- > Anshum Gupta > Naukri Labs! > http://ai-cafe.blogspot.com > > The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opinions to me. The > distinction is yours to draw............ > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:08 AM, prashant ullegaddi < > prashullega...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm running it on Quadcore, 2.4GHz each, 4GB RAM. > > > > Prashant. > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Otis Gospodnetic < > > otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com > > > wrote: > > > > > With such a large index be prepared to put it on a server with lots of > > RAM > > > (even if you follow all the tips from the Wiki). > > > When reporting performance numbers, you really ought to tell us about > > your > > > hardware, types of queries, etc. > > > > > > Otis > > > -- > > > Sematext is hiring -- http://sematext.com/about/jobs.html?mls > > > Lucene, Solr, Nutch, Katta, Hadoop, HBase, UIMA, NLP, NER, IR > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > > > From: prashant ullegaddi <prashullega...@gmail.com> > > > > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > > > > Sent: Monday, August 3, 2009 12:33:46 AM > > > > Subject: How to improve search time? > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I've a single index of size 87GB containing around 50M documents. > When > > I > > > > search for any query, > > > > best search time I observed was 8sec. And when query is expanded with > > > > synonyms, search takes > > > > minutes (~ 2-3min). Is there a better way to search so that overall > > > search > > > > time reduces? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Prashant. > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
