lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From 이지홍 <hong...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: indexing on nas storage
Date Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:34:09 GMT
how about Lucene ApI Changes Point.. Between WAS Local Disk And NAS Disk

it's same?
it doesn't matter Storage Platfform?
I will use Java Sdk 1.5 Platfform.




2009/3/20 Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>:
> There are no issues running lucene on any drive that provides fast and
> reliable random access reads.
>
> Some SAN drives will work better than cheap local disks and those work
> pretty well.
>
> It is even possible to run Lucene with an index in a decidedly unfriendly
> file system (from the standpoint of random access reads) like HDFS.
>
> How well it works depends a lot on your particular work load.  The long tail
> applies here; most retrieval applications are pretty small and only a few
> are really, really huge.  For small applications up to a million or a few
> million documents and queries arriving every few seconds, and low update
> rates, you should be fine almost no matter what you are using.  For hundreds
> of queries per second against hundreds of millions of documents with lots of
> updates, you have a completely different kettle of fish that will require
> completely different techniques.  For really large systems, you have to
> implement scalable clustered systems and the necessary considerations are
> much broader than just disk I/O rates.
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:58 PM, 이지홍 <hongsgo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I wonder if there are any known issues having a lucene index on a NAS
>> or SAN drive?  Some
>> basic tests show that it works fine.  But are there performance issues
>> with indexing on NAS
>> for instance?
>>
>>
> --
> Ted Dunning, CTO
> DeepDyve
>

Mime
View raw message