DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG� RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34930>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND� INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34930 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-17 04:19 ------- Doug, after more testing, you are correct that tweaking the maxBuffered from 10,000 to 5000 gives slightly better performance. However I believe this is because with maxBufferedDocs==5000, this loop counter is reset more frequently, and so suffers less of the CPU drain. I ran more tests using the hacked version using both 5000 and 10000, and the hacked version still runs better. I'll attach an Excel sheet with the results, but I only had time to run it over 5 samples each run, which is not exactly statistically significant, but hopefully still correct. As you can see, deferring this loop enables larger maxBuffered to gain ahead of smaller maxBufferedDocs. As always with these tests there are transient factors that affect things (getting DB results for one thing). -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
