Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 5266 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2008 16:23:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Jan 2008 16:23:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 34771 invoked by uid 500); 25 Jan 2008 16:23:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 34561 invoked by uid 500); 25 Jan 2008 16:23:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 34550 invoked by uid 99); 25 Jan 2008 16:23:34 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:23:34 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates 72.14.220.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [72.14.220.158] (HELO fg-out-1718.google.com) (72.14.220.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:23:19 +0000 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so704848fga.3 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:23:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XP++krLtVhhdTxamW+Tx/KfLwhgt7vIZVk6HtJILzoE=; b=SktHmesGpQxwc2ZZgjiPRoJhi/tFDsfm+gdJP/tXAHq46DsahiKmc8fNKh7ut1uyoHy72owhe+HGBHVvxqNhj4XE43kWqz5d9dNtGtEvLG+uU0mdabzwJKUp3QuipXOLonAPpKig9Tf1Xq2talzBHUk898bV2fdGWFSphJ+RBPc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pmqUzuJjtod5A3zgtO/0UwSeuJfhocMvy+1RbGk6JPAKHDmRXaD7U7vJhtPHTN2WYgpuUKSQOCYO9nHvSggAccCMXB3tJhNfSbVdHV9l3IxN3zWeJmiPH0oCOKkSKL6Fd/lttlTesFvzTDlv1//tM7CUGLYYfdZ9asd6QvrPwmQ= Received: by 10.82.149.8 with SMTP id w8mr3889424bud.24.1201278191710; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:23:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.0.1? ( [82.66.216.176]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c28sm4994310fka.0.2008.01.25.08.23.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:23:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <479A0CBF.5020302@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:22:23 +0100 From: Emmanuel Lecharny User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14pre (X11/20071023) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Apache Directory Developers List Subject: Re: Searching takes unrealistic time. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Siva Kumar wrote: > Thank you for the tip Emmanuel. > You're welcomed, Siva > But its not seem to help me. > May be because the cache size you selected is far from being large enough. Let me explain. Suppose that disk access are 100 times slower than memory access. If it cost T to reach data from disk, with 40 000 elements, if you cache 100 of them, then you will have a ratio of 100/40000 access done in T/100 and 39900/40000 access done in T. Average access time = (39900/40000*T + 100/4000000*(T/100)) = 99,7525% T (~ T, in other terms). Now, you have a 5000 cache size. What does it means in term of performance increase ? 5000/40000 access done in T/100 35000/40000 access done in T Average : (5000/40000*T/100 + 35000/40000*T) = 87,625% T. In other terms, roughly a 10% speedup. Almost unnoticeable... Do what I said : set the cache size to 40000, increase your JVM memory . PS : You can also increase the cachesize for entries ( the cachesize parameter associated with your partition, not those associated with index). Hope it helps... -- -- cordialement, regards, Emmanuel L�charny www.iktek.com directory.apache.org