ier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Zhang [mailto:zhangjcm...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 6:26 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Please Help solve problem of bad read
g
>> Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 12:26 PM
>> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Please Help solve problem of bad read performance in lucene
>> 4.2.1
>>
>>
>> thianks Adrien,
>> In my project, almost all hit docs are supposed to be f
ry performance in in 4.x vs. 3.x? That's the true, proper
> measure of Lucene and Solr performance.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> -Original Message- From: Chris Zhang
> Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 12:26 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Please
e-
From: Chris Zhang
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 12:26 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Please Help solve problem of bad read performance in lucene
4.2.1
thianks Adrien,
In my project, almost all hit docs are supposed to be fetched for every
query, what's why I am upset b
thianks Adrien,
In my project, almost all hit docs are supposed to be fetched for every
query, what's why I am upset by the poor reading performance. Maybe I
should store field values which are expected to be stored in high
performance storage engine.
In the above test case, time consuming of readi
Indeed, Lucene 4.1+ may be a bit slower for indices that comptelely
fit in your file-system cache. On the other hand, you should see
better performance with indices which are larger than the amount of
physical memory of your machine. Your reading benchmark only measures
IndexReader.get(int) which s
hi ,
Sorry to interrupt you, but I am really confused by the bad performance
of lucene 4.2.1. Recently I migrated project from lucene 3.0 to 4.2.1 .
After simply tests I found that both indexing and reading performance of
lucene 4 can not match the older version.
Indexing code snippets are as
