On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Beard, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Question: If autoCommit is false, does this apply to optimization also,
so that during an hour long optimization that gets killed in the middle,
will the index be in the left in the initial state before optimization
I just did an update from lucene 2.2.0 to 2.3.2 and thought I'd give
some kudos for the indexing performance enhancements.
The lucene indexing portion is about 6-8 times faster. Previously we
were doing ~60-120 documents per second, now we're between 400-1000,
depending on the type of document,
I just did an update from lucene 2.2.0 to 2.3.2 and thought I'd give
some kudos for the indexing performance enhancements.
The lucene indexing portion is about 6-8 times faster. Previously we
were doing ~60-120 documents per second, now we're between 400-1000,
depending on the type of document,
This is great to hear!
If you tweak things a bit (increase RAM buffer size, use
autoCommit=false, use threads, etc) you should be able to eke out some
more gains...
Are you storing fields using term vectors on any of your fields?
Mike
Beard, Brian wrote:
I just did an update from
save a lot on
index size, which would speed up copy time during swapping between
search and update indexes).
-Original Message-
From: Michael McCandless [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 10:38 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: performance feedback
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Beard, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will try tweaking RAM, and check about autoCommit=false. It's on the
future agenda to multi-thread through the index writer. The indexing
time I quoted includes the document creation time which would definitely
improve
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Beard, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will try tweaking RAM, and check about autoCommit=false. It's on the
future agenda to multi-thread through the index writer. The indexing
time I quoted includes the document creation time which would definitely
improve
