Hi Tom, It wouldn't. I didn't see the mention of parallel indexing in the original email. :)
Otis ---- Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch Hadoop ecosystem search :: http://search-hadoop.com/ ----- Original Message ---- > From: Tom Burton-West <tburtonw...@gmail.com> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 3:30:05 PM > Subject: Re: What is largest reasonable setting for ramBufferSizeMB? > > > Thanks Otis, > > I don't know enough about Hadoop to understand the advantage of using Hadoop > in this use case. How would using Hadoop differ from distributing the > indexing over 10 shards on 10 machines with Solr? > > Tom > > > > Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > 32MB is very low, 320MB is medium, and I think you could go higher, just > > pick whichever garbage collector is good for throughput. I know Java 1.6 > > update 18 also has some Hotspot and maybe also GC fixes, so I'd use that. > > Finally, this sounds like a good use case for reindexing with Hadoop! > > > > Otis > > ---- > > Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch > > Hadoop ecosystem search :: http://search-hadoop.com/ > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/What-is-largest-reasonable-setting-for-ramBufferSizeMB--tp27631231p27645167.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
