Thanks a lot. I have an idea, Can I use lucene on a 64bits VM? In the condition, I can load all index files to ram. Then no io operation, I can execute concurrent search in thread pool.
Its performance will be better? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael McCandless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:59 AM Subject: Re: How to use lucene for high search performance ? Let's move this thread to java-user (CC'd). 王建新 wrote: > Thank you. > > If the index files are very big(10G), I cannot load them to ram in > one process. Ahh OK. > Shoud I use MutilSearcher to load index files with serval processes? > How about its performance? MultiSearcher alone doesn't really scale up -- it just lets you combine the results of many Searchables. Maybe you mean ParallelMlultiSearcher? That class uses a separate thread to search each Searchable, so if you are on a multi core/cpu machine that should give a net reduction in latency of each search (though I don't have any experience here!). > by the way, I think only .frq and .tis files need to load in ram. > And it can save some ram. You mean you don't use any positions information? Really the OS should do the right thing for you -- it should only cache into its IO cache those files that you actually use after which searches should be fast. Mike > > roy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael McCandless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 6:09 PM > Subject: Re: How to use lucene for high search performance ? > > > > Try InstantiatedIndexWriter/Reader (under contrib/instantiated)? > > It consumes more RAM than the RAMDirectory approach, but is faster > performance. > > Mike > > PS -- this sort of question should go to java-user in the future. > > 王建新 wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> If I use lucene to execute many search requests at one time, the >> io operation will be the bottleneck of the performance. >> So I use RAMDirectory to avoid io operation. >> But I found RAMDirectory cannot raise the performance much if the >> index is big( about 1.2G). >> Could anyone give me any advice to raise the performance for >> concurrent search operation? >> Thanks. >> >> roy
