There was a change in Xindice v1.1 that could possibly be responsible for database size increase.
Xindice v1.0 failed to correctly allocate initial file space for a collection according to its page size and page count parameters, so a collection with just a few documents would occupy several Kb on disk instead of reserving some space on disk for the collection to grow. It was fixed in v1.1 and a collection with default page size (4Kb) and page count (1024) parameters now occupies about 4Mb. If you had several small collections in Xindice v1.0 it is possible that after rebuilding them for v1.1 the database would take considerably more disk space. How many collections do you have in that database and how big are the collections? If this indeed is the reason for the database increase, it could be fixed by adjusting page count parameter for small collections. Also, I think Meta collections were introduced somewhere between 1.0 and 1.1, I cannot remember now if they are created when rebuilding a database, but if they are, it would take some disk space, too. You can explore database directories to see if Meta collections are there (in system/Metas, I think). Meta collections can be turned off. Natalia On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 9:35 AM, OKO <ol...@sics.se> wrote: > > Ran xindice_rebuild on a smallish existing 1.0 database to get it into 1.1 > format. > The size was expanded enormously: > db 1.0: 2 M > db 1.1: 233 M > > That is a factor of 100 ;-( > > I have not dared do this on my real 1.0 database, which now occupies more > than 1G of disk space. > > *Question*: > - Is this a feature or a bug? > > Tool info as presented: > $ xindice -h > trying to register database > > Xindice Command Tools v1.1 > > ...etc... > > /O > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/xindice_rebuild---file-size-vastly-multiplied-tp23078111p23078111.html > Sent from the Xindice - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
