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-436
Date Fri, 12 May 2006 07:07:57 GMT
As stated many times, it is SIGNIFICANT if using RAMdirectories to hold
entire indexes. If not, then it is not such a big deal.

Rather than using FixedThreadLocal, a more involved solution using a runtime
property to determine which thread local impl to use is possible. In lieu of
that, RAMDirectories are either broken, or everyone takes a performance hit.


-----Original Message-----
From: Fernando Padilla [mailto:fern@alum.mit.edu]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:53 PM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: LUCENE-436


so... what do you think?

We just took the patch through QA and there was a noticeable memory
increase through time, and once we applied the patch, the memory didn't
increase..

So if you don't like the solution.. what are some alternatives?

fernando

ps - www.protrade.com


Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
> I'm not at home with some of the things mentioned in LUCENE-436, so I'm
not applying any of the various patches provided there, but it looks like
something that deserves attention.  I think it has been brought up a while
back, too.
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-436
>
> Otis
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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