Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42544 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2010 09:46:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 27 Mar 2010 09:46:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 56708 invoked by uid 500); 27 Mar 2010 09:46:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 56530 invoked by uid 500); 27 Mar 2010 09:46:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 56519 invoked by uid 99); 27 Mar 2010 09:46:48 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:46:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1151.5 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:46:47 +0000 Received: from brutus.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41AE8234C4F3 for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:46:27 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <366090023.526571269683187268.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:46:27 +0000 (UTC) From: "Michael McCandless (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2324) Per thread DocumentsWriters that write their own private segments In-Reply-To: <966773572.259991268631687364.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2324?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12850500#action_12850500 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2324: -------------------------------------------- I don't think we should delete in FG -- I suspect this'll give net/net worse performance, due to loss of locality. It also means you must always keep readers available, which is an unnecessary cost for non-NRT apps. deletesInRAM are those deletes done during the current segment. deletesFlushed absorbs deletesInRAM on successful segment flush. We have to segregate the two for proper recovery if we fail to flush the RAM buffer, eg say you hit a disk full while flushing a new segment, and then you close your IW successfully. We have to make sure in that case that deletesInRAM are discarded. > Per thread DocumentsWriters that write their own private segments > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-2324 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2324 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Index > Reporter: Michael Busch > Assignee: Michael Busch > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.1 > > Attachments: LUCENE-2324.patch > > > See LUCENE-2293 for motivation and more details. > I'm copying here Mike's summary he posted on 2293: > Change the approach for how we buffer in RAM to a more isolated > approach, whereby IW has N fully independent RAM segments > in-process and when a doc needs to be indexed it's added to one of > them. Each segment would also write its own doc stores and > "normal" segment merging (not the inefficient merge we now do on > flush) would merge them. This should be a good simplification in > the chain (eg maybe we can remove the *PerThread classes). The > segments can flush independently, letting us make much better > concurrent use of IO & CPU. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org