Return-Path: 
 <java-dev-return-28570-apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 91460 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2008 16:47:15 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Nov 2008 16:47:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 80261 invoked by uid 500); 19 Nov 2008 16:47:21 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80221 invoked by uid 500); 19 Nov 2008 16:47:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:java-dev@lucene.apache.org>
List-Id: <java-dev.lucene.apache.org>
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80212 invoked by uid 99); 19 Nov 2008 16:47:21 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:47:21 -0800
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0
	tests=SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [64.233.178.241] (HELO hs-out-0708.google.com) (64.233.178.241)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:45:58 +0000
Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id 4so23732hsl.5
        for <java-dev@lucene.apache.org>;
 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:46:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.90.29.17 with SMTP id c17mr921052agc.13.1227113191644;
        Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:46:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?10.17.4.4? (pool-96-237-252-30.bstnma.fios.verizon.net
 [96.237.252.30])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 39sm5640535agb.23.2008.11.19.08.46.30
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:46:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <2E7EC816-349A-415D-8EB3-F57F192C73D6@mikemccandless.com>
From: Michael McCandless <lucene@mikemccandless.com>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <49243F48.5090406@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Subject: Re: Option to  fsync files
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:46:28 -0500
References: <49242377.3050204@gmail.com>
 <8C44F3C4-4294-42F2-B3C1-2DF8C11C3838@mikemccandless.com>
 <49243F48.5090406@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org


Mark Miller wrote:

> It is dangerous, but probably not any more dangerous than using a  
> consumer hard drive that lies to sync (don't know the numbers, but I  
> have to assume some/many are doing this with Lucene - in which case  
> you pay perf for a false sense of security<g>).

Well, if the consumer drive is in fact lying, then sync should be  
wicked fast ;)  So you get a false sense of security without paying  
anything!

> Not a real suggestion at this point though. Just thinking about some  
> of the reports I have seen of much slower indexing with 2.4 (the  
> latest being to the solr list today). Can't imagine why someone  
> would see such a drastic change (I imagine you could imagine a lot  
> better), other than maybe the sync is hobbling their specific  
> situation (in which case i'd guess its not lying if it where going  
> to be so slow though <g> Or its AIX or something <g>). Would be cool  
> to be able to flip it off and test. Sounds like thats simple enough  
> already  though. I could whip up an off for solr testing easy enough.

Yeah let's dig down and get to the root cause here -- if turning off  
sync in fact fixes the slowdown we should understand why sync is being  
called so often.

Mike

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