Hi Tom,
I just see that you have Linux with 2.6 kernel.
Have you already -XX:+UseLargePages as performance option enabled and in use?
Solaris 9 has it on by default but with Linux HugePages must be enabled.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/tech/largememory-jsp-137182.html
Just an
Yes, definitely. Our typical setup is 16Gb physical RAM and -Xmx4G per node
(index size is about 1-1.5Gb per node). So there is plenty of room for OS
cache, I guess. I'll take a closer look at the number of major page faults, but
at the moment iostat says that everything is pretty fine.
On the
Hi,
can I have an advice to write an EJB app that R/W on Lucene's Indexs?
Please.
Thank you
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the fix. Checkindex finished within 24 hours, which is not
terrible, given the size of this index (about a terabyte)..
Tom
Opening index @ /htsolr/lss-dev/solrs/4.2/3/core/data/index
Segments file=segments_e numSegments=2 version=4.2.1 format=
Thanks for testing/confirmation!
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Tom Burton-West tburt...@umich.edu wrote:
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the fix. Checkindex finished within 24 hours, which is not
terrible, given the size of this index (about a terabyte)..
Tom
Opening index @
What kind of application are you trying to write?
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 6:31 AM, John C jse@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
can I have an advice to write an EJB app that R/W on Lucene's Indexs?
Please.
Thank you
Hi Mike,
Any more comments on this issue?
Thanks and best regards, Lisheng
-Original Message-
From: Zhang, Lisheng [mailto:lisheng.zh...@broadvision.com]
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 7:55 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: lucene 4.3 seems to be much slower in indexing
Hi, sorry, I don't have enough time to drill deeper here (run your
benchmark), but some quick ideas:
Only 8 documents is really a tiny index; try testing on many more documents?
Also, I would run more rounds than just 2; better to run 10s of rounds
and watch for the time per round to stabilize
Hi Mike,
Thanks very much for your insightful comments, I will try to test more.
Best regards, Lisheng
-Original Message-
From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 9:46 AM
To: Lucene Users
Subject: Re: lucene 4.3 seems to be much slower in
On 08/09/2013 12:31 PM, John C wrote:
can I have an advice to write an EJB app that R/W on Lucene's Indexs?
You probably need Hibernate search.
Checkout: http://www.hibernate.org/subprojects/search.html
http://www.amazon.com/Hibernate-Search-Action-Emmanuel-Bernard/dp/1933988649
Hibernate
+(
((content:electro) (content:hydraulic) (content:power) (content:assist)
(content:steer))~5))
--
Brendan Grainger
www.kuripai.com
Sorry, hit send by accident previously. Anyway, I wanted to make sure my
interpretation of this query was correct:
+(((content:electro) (content:hydraulic) (content:power) (content:assist)
(content:steer))~5)
This is staying that all words: electro, hydraulic, power, assist and steer
in the
Hi,
when writing a large binaryDocValue, BinaryDocValuesWriter throws an
exception saying DocValuesField fieldName is too large, must be = 32766
Is there a way to avoid that limit?
Thanks,
Nicolas
Check out the discussion on:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4583
StraightBytesDocValuesField fails if bytes 32k
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Nicolas Guyot
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 5:57 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: DV limited to 32766
14 matches
Mail list logo