nfusings.
- 原邮件 -
发件人： Uwe Schindler
收件人： java-user@lucene.apache.org
抄送：
发送日期： 2013年8月7日, 星期三, 1:17 下午
主题: RE: 回复：RE: why lucene not use DirectByteBuffer in NIOFSDirectory
Hi,
1)
ByteBuffer bb=ByteBuffer.wrap(new byte[len]); //bb is HeapByteBuffer
channel.read
ijiang...@aliyun.com [mailto:wangzhijiang...@aliyun.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:36 AM
To: java-user
Subject: 回复：RE: why lucene not use DirectByteBuffer in NIOFSDirectory
Hi Uwe:
Thank you for your detail explaination and I learnt a lot from your
message.
First, the direct
---发件人：Uwe
Schindler发送日期：2013年7月31日
18:18收件人：java-user@lucene.apache.org;wangzhijiang...@yahoo.com.cn;主 题：RE: why
lucene not use DirectByteBuffer in NIOFSDirectory Hi,There is a
misunderstanding: Just by allocating a direct buffer, there is still no
difference to a heap buffer in the workflo
9 AM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: why lucene not use DirectByteBuffer in NIOFSDirectory
>
> I read this article "Use Lucene's MMapDirectory on 64bit platforms, please!"
> and it said the MMapDirectory is better than other Directory because it will
> v
I read this article "Use Lucene's MMapDirectory on 64bit platforms, please!"
and it said the MMapDirectory is better than other Directory because it will
void copy data between file system cache and java heap.
I checked the source code of NIOFSDirectory, and in new Buffer method it called
"Byt
