lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <>
Subject Re: Large scale sorting
Date Mon, 09 Apr 2007 22:24:53 GMT
Paul Smith wrote:
> I don't disagree with the premise that it involves substantial I/O and 
> would increase the time taken to sort, and why this approach shouldn't 
> be the default mechanism, but it's not too difficult to build a disk I/O 
> subsystem that can allocate many spindles to service this and to allow 
> the underlying OS to use it's buffer cache (yes this is sounding like a 
> database server now isn't it).

My guess is that it'd be cheaper to just buy more RAM.

> It would be better if the sorting 
> mechanism in Lucene was a little more decoupled such that more 
> customised designs could be utilitised for specific scenarios.  Right 
> now it's a one-for-all approach without substantial gutting of the code.

That's just what most folks have found useful to date.  If you have a 
patch to decouple it, and others find it useful, then it should be 
seriously considered.  I do have some concerns about whether the 
approach you suggest is in fact useful, but am happy to be proven wrong.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message