My indexes are stored on a NetApp filter via NFS. The indexer process
updates the indexes over NFS. I have multiple indexes. My search
process determines if the nfs indexes have been updated, and if they
have, then loads the index into a RAMDirectory. RAMDirectory is of
course much faster than
When comparing RAMDirectory and FSDirectory it is important to mention
what OS you are using. When using linux it will cache the most recent
disk access in memory. Here is a good article that describes its
strategy: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=175419
The 2% difference you are seeing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I experiensed on my 2 cpu box, during the query execution both
processors were realy busy. The question is would it accelerate speed if I
get 4 cpu box, 10 cpu...
I mean real performance boost (at least factor 10), not just %-ge.
I'm no expert on this, but I would
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22.11.2004 21:40
Please respond to "Lucene Users List"
To: Lucene Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: (bcc: Iouli Golovatyi/X/GP/Novartis)
Subject:Re: Index in RAM - is it realy worthy?
Category:
Otis G
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
For the Lucene book I wrote some test cases that compare FSDirectory
and RAMDirectory. What I found was that with certain settings
FSDirectory was almost as fast as RAMDirectory. Personally, I would
push FSDirectory and hope that the OS and the Filesystem do their share
of
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
For the Lucene book I wrote some test cases that compare FSDirectory
and RAMDirectory. What I found was that with certain settings
FSDirectory was almost as fast as RAMDirectory. Personally, I would
push FSDirectory and hope that the OS and the Filesystem do their share
of
In my test, I have 12900 documents. Each document is small, a few
discreet fields (KeyWord type) and 1 Text field containing only 1
sentence.
with both mergeFactor and maxMergeDocs being 1000
using RamDirectory, the indexing job took about 9.2 seconds
not using RamDirectory, the indexing job too
For the Lucene book I wrote some test cases that compare FSDirectory
and RAMDirectory. What I found was that with certain settings
FSDirectory was almost as fast as RAMDirectory. Personally, I would
push FSDirectory and hope that the OS and the Filesystem do their share
of work and caching for me
I did following test:
I created the RAM folder on my Red Hat box and copied c. 1Gb of indexes
there.
I expected the queries to run much quicker.
In reality it was even sometimes slower(sic!)
Lucene has it's own RAM disk functionality. If I implement it, would it
bring any benefits?
Thanks in
