lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gerrit Jansen van Vuuren (Commented) (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3653) Lucene Search not scalling
Date Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:02:30 GMT


Gerrit Jansen van Vuuren commented on LUCENE-3653:

OK, so for searching (after loading) the RAMFile synced methods would not be called, now bare
with me for a moment:

This does not seem to be the case when you retrieve the Document, which is probably to be
In my code I do:

searcher.doc(matched[i].doc) //searcher == IndexSearcer and matched[] == ScoreDoc[] 

In my code I see the following call trace (Top to Bottom):


Which means I can search concurrently but as soon as I try to retrieve something again I hit
Now I appreciate that with File IO this is required but a fully in memory index should not
have these problems. I'm trying to change the RAMFile usage so that it does not require synchronization.

> Lucene Search not scalling
> --------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-3653
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Gerrit Jansen van Vuuren
>         Attachments:, LUCENE-3653-VirtualMethod+AttributeSource.patch, LUCENE-3653-VirtualMethod+AttributeSource.patch,
lucene-unsync.diff, profile_1_a.png, profile_1_b.png, profile_1_c.png, profile_1_d.png, profile_2_a.png,
profile_2_b.png, profile_2_c.png
> I've noticed that when doing thousands of searches in a single thread the average time
is quite low i.e. a few milliseconds. When adding more concurrent searches doing exactly the
same search the average time increases drastically. 
> I've profiled the search classes and found that the whole of lucene blocks on 
> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentCoreReaders.getTermsReader
> org.apache.lucene.util.VirtualMethod
>   public synchronized int getImplementationDistance 
> org.apache.lucene.util.AttributeSourcew.getAttributeInterfaces
> These cause search times to increase from a few milliseconds to up to 2 seconds when
doing 500 concurrent searches on the same in memory index. Note: That the index is not being
updates at all, so not refresh methods are called at any stage.
> Some questions:
>   Why do we need synchronization here?
>   There must be a non-lockable solution for these, they basically cause lucene to be
ok for single thread applications but disastrous for any concurrent implementation.
> I'll do some experiments by removing the synchronization from the methods of these classes.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see:


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

View raw message