[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2292?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12974788#action_12974788
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-2292:
---------------------------------------
bq. This class uses ByteBuffer, which has its overhead over simple byte[],
In my experience ByteBuffer has basically no performance overhead over byte[]
if you construct it by wrapping a byte[]. The JVM seems smart enough to figure
out that there's a good old array behind the ByteBuffer.
But if I allocated the BB in any other way it was 2-4x slower in my simple
tests on a mac with a sun JVM.
So it might be the right thing to put these changes into RAMDirectory and have
it by default wrap a byte[] and add an (expert) API to allow allocating the BB
in other ways.
> ByteBuffer Directory - allowing to store the index outside the heap
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2292
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2292
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Store
> Reporter: Shay Banon
> Attachments: LUCENE-2292.patch, LUCENE-2292.patch, LUCENE-2292.patch
>
>
> A byte buffer based directory with the benefit of being able to create direct
> byte buffer thus storing the index outside the JVM heap.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
