-----Original Message-----
From: Toke Eskildsen [mailto:t...@statsbiblioteket.dk]
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 3:48 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: NewBie To Lucene || Perfect configuration on a 64 bit server
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 11:56 +0200, Shruthi wrote:
Toke:
> Is 20 second an acceptable response time for your users?
>
> Shruthi: Its definitely not acceptable. PFA the piece of code that we
> are using..Its taking 20seconds. That’s why I drafted this ticket to
> see where I was going wrong.
Indexing 1000 documents/sec in Lucene is quite common, so even taking
into account large documents, 20 seconds sounds like quite a bit.
Shruthi: I had attached the code snippet in previous mail. Do you suspect a
foul play there?
> Shruthi: Well, its two stage process: Client is looking at
> historical data based on a parameters like names, dates,MRN, fields
> etc.. SO the query actually gets the data set fulfilling the
> requirements
>
> If client is interested in doing a text search then he would pass the
> search phrase on the result set.
So it is not possible for a client to perform a broad phrase search to
start with. And it sounds like your DB-queries are all simple matching?
No complex joins and such? If so, this calls even more for a full
Lucene-index solution, which handles all aspect of the search process.
Shruthi: We call a DB stored procedure to get us the result set for working
with..
We will be using highlighter API and I don’t think Memory index can be used
with highlighter.
>
- Toke Eskildsen, State and University Library, Denmark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
