lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Worms <da...@simpledesign.com>
Subject [LARM] using SEDA, pros and cons
Date Mon, 17 Feb 2003 22:32:44 GMT

In order to move our project to the next level, it has been discussed 
the use of an SEDA architecture.

With the help of the Excalibur / Event library, I created a simplified 
version of Larm which use SEDA as its backbone architecture. The goal 
was not to make it pretty or even working, but to see how each 
application components could feet in an event stage architecture.

The great thing I notice is how flexible the application become. it is 
extremely easy to map each stage with the others. One of the features 
of LARM is the ability to have different sources( db, web, filesystem, 
... ), process them, and store them (lucene index, log, ...). This 
seems easily achieveable with SEDA. Also clustering the LARM could be 
done through a specific stage implementation.

This was for the pros. However, it will be great to get some feedback 
because I am really not sure on how to deal with SEDA. here is some 
problems I am facing.

- In order for the crawler to be efficient, I had to raise the number 
of threads, but from what I read in the past, only one or two threads 
should be used in a SEDA environment.

- Also, it looks to consume a lot of memory, which could be due to the 
number of messages put into the queue.

Clemens, and others, please have a look of it, and give me some 
feedback.

http://67.116.155.180/~wdavidw/stage.zip

David.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message