On Thu, 13 May 2004, Matt Quail wrote: > > do you know of any method to reduce the memory consumption of lucene > > when searching? > > It depends on the complexity of the search, I think. Also, I belive > scoring might use more memory than the search itself (can anyone confirm > this?). For example, I often use the HitCollector interface (and a > BitSet) for queries where I am not interested in the score. > > Apart from that, I'm not aware of any other methods for reducing the > memory consumption.
Avoid prefix queries and wildcards, since they can be rewritten into large boolean queries. You can limit the rewritting with a maximum number of clauses in a BooleanQuery to prevent requests from taking too much memory. > =Matt > > Sascha Ottolski wrote: > > > Am Donnerstag, 13. Mai 2004 12:56 schrieb Matt Quail: > > > >>>I noticed that most users have +- 1G of RAM to run Lucene. Does > >>>anyone have experiences running it on a 128MB or 256MB machine? > >> > >>I regularly test my app that uses Lucene by passing -Xmx8m to the > >>JVM; this is on a box with 1G of ram, but the JVM never more than 8M. > >>My app runs fine (though there is a little more garbage collection > >>activity). > > > > > > do you know of any method to reduce the memory consumption of lucene > > when searching? I've just increased from 400 to --Xmx500m, since > > sometimes OutOfMemoryExceptions occured (running suns java 1.4.2_04 and > > lucene-1.4rc3 on an index with ca. 18 Mio entries, building an index > > (including stored-only-fields) of 9 GB). > > > > I've seen that there are ways to limit the memory need for indexing and > > optimizing(?) by reducing the MergeFactor, but that doesn't seem to > > apply for searching :-( > > > > Thanks, > > > > Sascha > > > > > >>=Matt sv --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
