l: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
--
Thomas Becker
Senior JEE Developer
net mobile AG
Zollhof 17
40221 Düsseldorf
GERMANY
Phone:+49 211 97020-195
Fax: +49 211 97020-949
Mobile: +49 173 5146567 (
t was only
> one search, you must have two segments and therefore no optimized index for
> this to be correct?
>
> Uwe
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> Fo
IndexSearcher.search was called only
> once.
>
> Uwe
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
--
Thomas Becker
Senior JEE Deve
guess, based on
> the 2.9 new api profiling, is that your queries may not be agreeing with
> some of the changes somehow. Along with the profiling, can you fill us
> in on the query types you are using as well? (eg qualities)
>
> And grab invocations if its possible.
>
--
Thomas B
ry types you are using as well? (eg qualities)
>>
>> And grab invocations if its possible.
>>
>> --
>> - Mark
>>
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Thomas Becker wrote:
>>> Tests run on tmpfs:
>>> config: impl=Sepa
g, can you fill us
> in on the query types you are using as well? (eg qualities)
>
> And grab invocations if its possible.
>
--
Thomas Becker
Senior JEE Developer
net mobile AG
Zollhof 17
40221 Düsseldorf
GERMANY
Phone:+49 211 97020-195
Fax: +49 211 97020-949
gt; https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-753
>
--
Thomas Becker
Senior JEE Developer
net mobile AG
Zollhof 17
40221 Düsseldorf
GERMANY
Phone:+49 211 97020-195
Fax: +49 211 97020-949
Mobile: +49 173 5146567 (private)
E-Mail: mailto:thomas.bec...@net-m.de
Internet: http:/
uesday, September 15, 2009 5:30 PM
>> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: lucene 2.9.0RC4 slower than 2.4.1?
>>
>> Thomas Becker wrote:
>>> Hey Mark,
>>>
>>> yes. I'm running the app on unix. You see the difference between 2.9 and
>>
Mark Miller wrote:
> Thomas Becker wrote:
>> Hey Mark,
>>
>> yes. I'm running the app on unix. You see the difference between 2.9 and 2.4
>> here:
>>
>> http://ankeschwarzer.de/tmp/graph.jpg
>>
> Right - I know your measurements showed
org/jira/browse/LUCENE-753
>
--
Thomas Becker
Senior JEE Developer
net mobile AG
Zollhof 17
40221 Düsseldorf
GERMANY
Phone:+49 211 97020-195
Fax: +49 211 97020-949
Mobile: +49 173 5146567 (private)
E-Mail: mailto:thomas.bec...@net-m.de
Internet: http://www.net-m.de
Registergericht: Amts
;s), and that appears to be a real
> killer for you. Its taking half the time for its
> reads. ???
>
> No conclusions yet, but I'm looking it over. Some other guys will come
> in with some ideas as well.
>
> Do confirm that those profiling results are on a si
with lucene 2.4. I will now try a freshly build 2.9 index and see if performance
improves. Maybe that already solves the issue...stupid me...
We're updating the index every 30 min. at the moment and it gets optimized after
each update.
Mark Miller wrote:
> Thomas Becker wrote:
>> Hey Mar
nerCache is a Map containing field + parser
* (contracttocontentgroup prefix) as the key and as a value yet another map.
* The latter map finally contains the docIds as key and positionvalue for this
* prefix as value.
*
* @author Thomas Becker (thomas.bec...@net-m.de)
*
*/
pub
Urm and uploaded here:
http://ankeschwarzer.de/tmp/graph.jpg
Sorry.
Thomas Becker wrote:
> Missed the attachment, sorry.
>
> Thomas Becker wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm experiencing a performance degradation after migrating to 2.9 and running
>> some tests.
Missed the attachment, sorry.
Thomas Becker wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm experiencing a performance degradation after migrating to 2.9 and running
> some tests. I'm getting out of ideas and any help to identify the reasons why
> 2.9 is slower than 2.4 are highly appreci
y took {} ms", durationMillis);
}
return docs;
}
I'm wondering why others are experiencing better performance with 2.9 and why
our implementations performance is going bad. Maybe our way of using the 2.9 api
is not the best and sorting is definetly
mpDir);
with
IndexSearcher indexSearcherTmp = new IndexSearcher(tmpDir, true);
No errors in the logfiles, no catched exceptions, etc. I'm a kinda out of ideas
at the moment. I googled and tried couple of things
(IndexWriter.setUseCompoundFile(true), etc.) but didn't find a
solution. A
/www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM
>>>> _WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
>>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-u
Btw. I tried the wildcard since I found something on google, which noted
wildcards together with StartsWith queries.
Thomas Becker wrote:
Hi Ian,
no the wild cards should not be necessary. That was just the last try
out of some. I now the exact content of both fields in my range query.
The
ks odd to me and I don't know what the effect would be.
I'd also prefer everything in lower case but maybe you've got the
right analyzers being used consistently in indexing and searching
chains.
--
Ian.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Thomas Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Name fields in a range between "A Balladeer*" TO "A
Perfect Circle*" and get only terms back which are starting with that
terms? Is there a way to accomplish that in Java and try it in luke?
And is there a way to sort resultsets in luke?
Cheers,
Thomas
--
Thomas Be
21 matches
Mail list logo
