jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcel Reutegger <marcel.reuteg...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: Fine tunning jcr query
Date Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:44:30 GMT
Hi,

what version of jackrabbit are you using and what's your workspace.xml
configuration?

see also this post:
http://www.nabble.com/Explanation-and-solutions-of-some-Jackrabbit-queries-regarding-performance-td15028655.html

regards
 marcel

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 13:52, sidhama <sidhartha.mallik@wipro.com> wrote:
>
> Marcel,
> Thanks for the response, i tried your suggestion, and it came down to 21
> secs, but my requirement is something well below 10 secs.
>
> Is there any way i can utilize the lucene package provided with jackrabbit
> implementation with explicit programming.
> If what are the config changes or overriding i need to do.
> I searched through web but no pointer for creating customizing classes from
> lucene packages i.e. writing my own lucene query builder, queryImpl or
> results etc.
>
> I need your suggestion.
>
> Thanks
> Sidharth
>
>
> Marcel Reutegger-5 wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> like queries with a prefix wildcard are usually expensive. for your
>> case you rather want to test the existence of the property:
>>
>> /jcr:root/Catalogs/catalog_1/Servers//*[@serverID]
>>
>> that's probably a lot faster.
>>
>> regards
>>  marcel
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 17:44, sidhama <sidhartha.mallik@wipro.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sir/Mam,
>>> I am executing the following query for getting the counts of Servers.
>>> -----------
>>> /jcr:root/Catalogs/catalog_1/Servers//*[jcr:like(@serverID, '%')]
>>> -----------
>>>
>>> It has around 150,000 nodes and it takes closely 26 secs for retrieving
>>> the
>>> results,
>>> I modified it to by removing <Servers> folder
>>> -----------
>>> /jcr:root/Catalogs/catalog_1//*[jcr:like(@serverID, '%')]
>>> -----------
>>>
>>> It is giving a response time of 19secs, can i reduce it further well
>>> below
>>> 6/7 secs?
>>>
>>> Please suggest if i could fine tune the query, why any jcr query executed
>>> first time takes a longer time, but subsquently takes less time?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Sidharth
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Fine-tunning-jcr-query-tp25858002p25858002.html
>>> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Fine-tunning-jcr-query-tp25858002p25924125.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Mime
View raw message