[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3653?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13172111#comment-13172111
 ] 

Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-3653:
-----------------------------------------

Gerrit, before I spend time on fixing this single IMO likely uncontented lock 
in org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentCoreReaders.getTermsReader() can I ask you to 
run your tests / benchmarks with -XX:BiasedLockingStartupDelay=0 as far as I 
can see you are running micro benchmarks which start up very quickly. Locks 
accessed right after startup behave differently in the JVM than other locks ie. 
sync blocks. Can you retest and report back?

simon
                
> Lucene Search not scalling
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-3653
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3653
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Gerrit Jansen van Vuuren
>         Attachments: App.java, 
> LUCENE-3653-VirtualMethod+AttributeSource.patch, 
> LUCENE-3653-VirtualMethod+AttributeSource.patch, 
> LUCENE-3653-VirtualMethod+AttributeSource.patch, lucene-unsync.diff, 
> profile_1_a.png, profile_1_b.png, profile_1_c.png, profile_1_d.png, 
> profile_2_a.png, profile_2_b.png, profile_2_c.png
>
>
> I've noticed that when doing thousands of searches in a single thread the 
> average time is quite low i.e. a few milliseconds. When adding more 
> concurrent searches doing exactly the same search the average time increases 
> drastically. 
> I've profiled the search classes and found that the whole of lucene blocks on 
> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentCoreReaders.getTermsReader
> org.apache.lucene.util.VirtualMethod
>   public synchronized int getImplementationDistance 
> org.apache.lucene.util.AttributeSourcew.getAttributeInterfaces
> These cause search times to increase from a few milliseconds to up to 2 
> seconds when doing 500 concurrent searches on the same in memory index. Note: 
> That the index is not being updates at all, so not refresh methods are called 
> at any stage.
> Some questions:
>   Why do we need synchronization here?
>   There must be a non-lockable solution for these, they basically cause 
> lucene to be ok for single thread applications but disastrous for any 
> concurrent implementation.
> I'll do some experiments by removing the synchronization from the methods of 
> these classes.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to