nal commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IndexSearcher-
on-multi-core-CPU-machine-tf3249889.html#a9043584
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
177 167
>>>> 100 4887 4056 3775
>>>
>>> Are you using a single or multiple IndexReaders?
>>>
>>> --
>>> karl
>>>
>>> -
>> times.
>>
>> Search is CPU bound (no IO wait is observed).
>> Is there any way to better utilize the server other than create
>> several
>> IndexSearchers?
>> I need to squeeze as m
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IndexSearcher-
on-multi-core-CPU-machine-tf3249889.html#a9043584
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com
-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/IndexSearcher-on-multi-core-CPU-machine-tf3249889.html#a9043584
Sent from the Luce
18 feb 2007 kl. 22.52 skrev dmitri:
With org.apache.lucene.store.MMapDirectory throughput is better but
I still
have to create multiple IndexSearcher instances to have 100% CPU
utilization.
With multiple IndexSearchers search times are better under
multithreaded
load.
concurrent 1 s
much performance as possible out of the
machine as we
have strict performance requirements.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IndexSearcher-
on-multi-core-CPU-machine-tf3249889.html#a9034207
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabbl
create several
IndexSearchers?
I need to squeeze as much performance as possible out of the machine as we
have strict performance requirements.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/IndexSearcher-on-multi-core-CPU-machine-tf3249889.html#a9034207
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users
