Hi Paul, Going by what you've conveyed here, I'd assume that you have more than some data. You could either go ahead with Ian's way which is the suggested one(as far as lucene implementation is concerned) but It'd not be possible if you're index is greater than 2 Gigs and you are not running the 64 bit version of JVM (as your JVM could not use more than 2Gigs of RAM otherwise). The other workaround that I've tried successfully is by creating a tmpfs partition and copying your index onto that tmpfs partition. This would also mean that you'd need almost the same amount of 'free' ram to copy the index onto the RAM. You could then open your reader in the regular fashion straight off the RAM based tmpfs. You could also go through the archives for suggestions. -- Anshum Gupta Naukri Labs! http://ai-cafe.blogspot.com
The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opinions to me. The distinction is yours to draw............ On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Paul Taylor <paul_t...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > Hi > > Ive built some file based indexes based on data in a database, and it took > quite some time. > I am interested in trying to use RAM based indexes instead of file based > indexes to compare search performance but its going to take some time to > rebuild the index from the original database, isnt it possible to rebuild > the index from the file based index ? > How big is a RAM index compared to File based index, I assumming its > slightly smaller because no files are created ? > > thanks Paul > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
