From lucene-dev-return-3796-qmlist-jakarta-archive-lucene-dev=nagoya.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org Thu Jul 10 01:07:22 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-lucene-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 88100 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2003 01:07:22 -0000 Received: from exchange.sun.com (192.18.33.10) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Jul 2003 01:07:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 10323 invoked by uid 97); 10 Jul 2003 01:09:56 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-lucene-dev@nagoya.betaversion.org Received: (qmail 10316 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2003 01:09:55 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by nagoya.betaversion.org with SMTP; 10 Jul 2003 01:09:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 87839 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jul 2003 01:07:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Lucene Developers List" Reply-To: "Lucene Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 87828 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2003 01:07:18 -0000 Received: from incze.adsl.enternet.hu (HELO incze.incze.hu) (62.112.223.117) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Jul 2003 01:07:18 -0000 Received: (from incze@localhost) by incze.incze.hu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h6A17OT26020 for lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 03:07:24 +0200 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 03:07:24 +0200 From: Incze Lajos To: Lucene Developers List Subject: Re: Directory implementation using NIO (moved from Lucene User List) Message-ID: <20030710030724.I13887@incze.incze.hu> References: <008801c34400$2a67f290$2700a8c0@ARIEL> <004c01c345fb$ad97a410$6a0010ac@teck> <010e01c3461c$e5976a00$c4f21b9d@ARIEL> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <010e01c3461c$e5976a00$c4f21b9d@ARIEL>; from bellomi@profs.sci.univr.it on Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 03:20:41PM +0200 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > Roughly, a 20% speedup > > > In my case and with my hardware configuration, the index > > is too big to be loaded in memory with RAMDirectory. > > On a smaller index or with less RAM available FSDirectory should be > > faster? > On a very heavily buffering system (like e.g linux) I would not expect more difference than this 20%. The main difference is not that either is in memory the other is not in, but the access is throuh inode or page mapped IO (booth from memory, mostly). That takes the difference. (At least I think so.) incze --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org