> I just fixed the bug and your benchmarks run fine w/o any modification > on my machine, so they should run fine on your end too! > Thank you Mattias! So, in the end it was a neo4j-index bug? Thus I assume we don't need to modify our code (of course we'll take into consideration your previous recommendations for using the BatchInserter, but for the sake of it, we would also like to run the benchmark in transactional mode as well).
> The bug is just committed so the latest build will be available within > an hour. I see that you aren't using maven, am I right? In that case > you can download it from > http://m2.neo4j.org/org/neo4j/neo4j-index/1.0-SNAPSHOT/ (look for .jar > files around this date/time + 1 hour or something). Or you could check > out the code and build it yourself: > > svn co https://svn.neo4j.org/components/index/trunk > Out of the two built jars of 29th Jan 2010, I guess we should use the most recent one (neo4j-index-1.0-20100129.113202-3.jar), right? > You could update to the latest neo4j-kernel as well, but maybe that's > not necessary though. > We'll first try out to update just the neo-index. If we face more problems we'll proceed with the kernel update as well. Thanks again for the prompt response! > 2010/1/29 Mattias Persson <matt...@neotechnology.com>: > >> 2010/1/29 Symeon (Akis) Papadopoulos <papa...@iti.gr>: >> >>> Mattias Persson wrote: >>> >>>> Another problem I see is that you're having too granular transactions >>>> which will slow down the insertion process quite a bit. Try grouping a >>>> couple of thousands operations in one transaction and you'll see a >>>> performance boost! >>>> >>>> FYI: I can trigger the problem you were having with lucene "too many >>>> open files" issue. And I'm almost 100% sure that it will be resolved >>>> if you increase the span of your transactions. >>>> >>>> >>> That's what we are already doing through the class SimpleBatchTxManager >>> (in package org.neo4j.util). We group read and write transactions in >>> batches of some thousands. Isn't this correct? >>> >> You're right, sorry for missing that. >> >> However I just found the bug which causes this... hang on, I'll fix it >> in an hour or two! >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Neo mailing list >>> User@lists.neo4j.org >>> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] >> Neo Technology, www.neotechnology.com >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ Neo mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
