lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Engels" <reng...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject RE: Lucene vs. Ruby/Odeum
Date Thu, 02 Jun 2005 14:22:14 GMT
One more thing, I did some simple tests with my caching enhancements. And
using a similar test (performing the search for the same word over and
over), there was a 100% performance improvement, so I would expect Lucene to
blow the doors of Odeum in this case.

This is why 'test cases' are so easy to manipulate. I am sure there are
parameter's for Odeum that allow you to increase its index & data block
cache sizes, but the minimum/defaults may be enough to hold all of the data
necessary for the test. As the test coverage gets wider, allocating more
buffer space will usually compensate, and give similar performance numbers.


-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:erik@ehatchersolutions.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 5:09 AM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene vs. Ruby/Odeum


Zed has updated his second part with more experiments with different
JVM's and memory settings:

     http://www.zedshaw.com/projects/ruby_odeum/odeum_lucene_part2.html

On Jun 2, 2005, at 12:27 AM, Robert Engels wrote:
> I read all of Zed's posts on the subject and I feel he certainly
> presents a
> strong anti-Java

Most definitely an anti-Java leaning - but at least he's working on
being objective about it by measuring things :)

> , if not anti-Lucene bias - maybe just pro Ruby.

He's quite pro-Lucene, and most definitely pro-Ruby.  I consider
myself in those categories myself.

> If you do not even adhere to the principle designer's "guidelines
> to proper
> usage", your tests are meaningless. It's akin to using a new flat
> screen
> monitor and claiming "boy, it has a fuzzy picture", because you didn't
> follow the instructions that said "remove protective film before
> using".

I concur with your sentiment and I've done what I can via e-mail with
him to educate him on my experience with Lucene and JVM garbage
collection.  I'd encourage anyone who has the the time and
inclination to take him up on the request to show how to do it better
since he's made his code available.

> Zed is using a very constrained test - which is probably very
> UNCOMMON in
> the real world of server based systems, to attempt to discern the
> relative
> performance characteristics of Lucene/Java/Ruby/etc. The tests may be
> applicable in his poorly designed environment, but he presents his
> limited
> finding as "gospel", and that it should hold true in all cases. I
> quote...
> "For the people who have no clue (also known as "Executives")
> here's the
> information you need to tell all your employees they need to adopt the
> latest and greatest thing without ever having to understand
> anything you
> read. Cheaper than an article in CIO magazine and even has big
> words like
> "standard deviation"." and then goes on to present his "statistically
> correct" performance numbers.

Don't get me wrong - Zed is using inflammatory language.  We should
work to not lower ourselves to speaking in that same tone but rather
objectively and nicely point out the errors of his ways.  He's open
to that despite his caustic tone - at least from the e-mail exchanges
I've had with him.

     Erik


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


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


Mime
View raw message