Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 11:07:49 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Simon Willnauer (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: 
 <774962763.43698.1336561669667.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <624692917.4687.1335434477450.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4022) Offline Sorter wrongly uses
 MIN_BUFFER_SIZE if there is more memory available
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4022?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13271312#comment-13271312 ] 

Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-4022:
-----------------------------------------

bq. How did you come up with the 10x factor though? Is it something off the top of your head?

I wanted to differentiate between a significantly bigger "unallocated" heap to force a grow if it makes sense so factor 10 seemed to be a good start. I mean this automatic stuff should be a conservative default that gives you reasonable performance. In the first place it should make sure your system is stable and doesn't run into OOM etc. It might seem somewhat arbitrarily. I will add a changes entry and commit this stuff. Seems like robert wants to roll a 3.6.1 soonish ;) 
                
> Offline Sorter wrongly uses MIN_BUFFER_SIZE if there is more memory available
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-4022
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4022
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: modules/spellchecker
>    Affects Versions: 3.6, 4.0
>            Reporter: Simon Willnauer
>            Assignee: Simon Willnauer
>             Fix For: 4.0, 3.6.1
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-4022.patch
>
>
> The Sorter we use for offline sorting seems to use the MIN_BUFFER_SIZE as a upper bound even if there is more memory available. See this snippet:
> {code}
> long half = free/2;
> if (half >= ABSOLUTE_MIN_SORT_BUFFER_SIZE) { 
>   return new BufferSize(Math.min(MIN_BUFFER_SIZE_MB * MB, half));
> }
>       
> // by max mem (heap will grow)
> half = (max - total) / 2;
> return new BufferSize(Math.min(MIN_BUFFER_SIZE_MB * MB, half));
> {code}
> use use use Math.max instead of min here.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

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