how about Lucene ApI Changes Point.. Between WAS Local Disk And NAS Disk it's same? it doesn't matter Storage Platfform? I will use Java Sdk 1.5 Platfform.
2009/3/20 Ted Dunning <[email protected]>: > There are no issues running lucene on any drive that provides fast and > reliable random access reads. > > Some SAN drives will work better than cheap local disks and those work > pretty well. > > It is even possible to run Lucene with an index in a decidedly unfriendly > file system (from the standpoint of random access reads) like HDFS. > > How well it works depends a lot on your particular work load. The long tail > applies here; most retrieval applications are pretty small and only a few > are really, really huge. For small applications up to a million or a few > million documents and queries arriving every few seconds, and low update > rates, you should be fine almost no matter what you are using. For hundreds > of queries per second against hundreds of millions of documents with lots of > updates, you have a completely different kettle of fish that will require > completely different techniques. For really large systems, you have to > implement scalable clustered systems and the necessary considerations are > much broader than just disk I/O rates. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:58 PM, 이지홍 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I wonder if there are any known issues having a lucene index on a NAS >> or SAN drive? Some >> basic tests show that it works fine. But are there performance issues >> with indexing on NAS >> for instance? >> >> > -- > Ted Dunning, CTO > DeepDyve >
