Vitaly Funstein [vfunst...@gmail.com] wrote:
> It's a bit of a guess on my part, but I did get better write and search
> performance with size <= 2K, as opposed to the default 16K.
For search that sounds plausible as that is very random access heavy and the
disk cache will contain a larger amount
.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Adrien Grand
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2014 4:50 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Stored fields and OS file caching
Hi Vitaly,
Doc values are indeed well-suited for grouping and sorting. However
stored fields remain better at returning
Thanks for the explanation, Adrien. I do have a couple of follow-up
questions. Isn't this block size used for file caching OS-dependent? And if
4K happens to be the most commonly used size, wouldn't it make more sense
for the default stored fields format to have a chunk size equal to or
smaller tha
Hi Vitaly,
Doc values are indeed well-suited for grouping and sorting. However
stored fields remain better at returning field values to users since
they guarantee a worst-case of one disk seek per document.
The filesystem cache typically caches data by blocks of 4KB. This
plays more nicely with d
I use stored fields to load values for the following use cases:
- to return per-document values as is, requested by the user - similar to
listing DB columns you are interested in, in a "select ..." clause.
- to perform aggregate function calculations while forming the result set
(if requested).
- f
Hi,
What are you doing with the stored fields? They are not deprecated and also not
really slow, unless you scan over millions of documents in random access order.
To display serach results, DocValues are of no use.
Uwe
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetap
