You can create two indexes. One will be for new documents, let say the
last 24 hours and another one for older documents. This way you will
only update a small portion of your index while the large index will
remain relatively constant so you don't have to get a new searcher for
it.
HTH
Aviran
ht
Another option would be to only re-open your searcher when actually
needed, that is after the index has changed. This only does you some
good when you have some hope that there are sizable gaps in
your modifications
Another possibility is to relax the "immediately" constraint. Would
a maximum
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 09:28:30AM -0400, Erick Erickson said:
> If that's unacceptable, you can *still* open up a new reader in the
> background and warm it up before using it. "immediately" then
> becomes 5-10 seconds or so.
This is currently what I'm doing using a list of previous performed
qu
Hi,
On 5/24/07, Erick Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If that's unacceptable, you can *still* open up a new reader in the
background and warm it up before using it. "immediately" then
becomes 5-10 seconds or so.
I've seen the term "warming" used a few times on the various lists.
What const
Yep. You probably want to do some sorting by other than relevancy
too in order to fill the sort caches.
Erick
On 5/24/07, Joe Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On 5/24/07, Erick Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If that's unacceptable, you can *still* open up a new reader in the
> b
On 5/24/07, Joe Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/24/07, Erick Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If that's unacceptable, you can *still* open up a new reader in the
> background and warm it up before using it. "immediately" then
> becomes 5-10 seconds or so.
I've seen the term "warming" u
