Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 89488 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2005 13:15:16 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Aug 2005 13:15:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 66183 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2005 13:15:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 66163 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2005 13:15:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 66150 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2005 13:15:08 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Aug 2005 06:15:08 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [64.74.127.3] (HELO svr.ftp1.com) (64.74.127.3) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Aug 2005 06:14:59 -0700 Received: from graphite by svr.ftp1.com with local (Exim 4.44) id 1Dza8G-0005oL-LB for java-user@lucene.apache.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2005 08:15:04 -0500 Received: from 192.223.163.5 ([192.223.163.5]) (SquirrelMail authenticated user tony@simpleobjects.com); by www.simpleobjects.com with HTTP; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 09:15:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <47952.192.223.163.5.1122902104.squirrel@192.223.163.5> In-Reply-To: <42ED9504.8040101@cosmicrealms.com> References: <42ED9504.8040101@cosmicrealms.com> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 09:15:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Any problems with a failed IndexWriter optimize call? From: "Tony Schwartz" To: java-user@lucene.apache.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a X-Mailer: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr.ftp1.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lucene.apache.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [32036 808] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - simpleobjects.com X-Source: /usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/bin/php X-Source-Args: /usr/local/cpanel/3rdparty/bin/php /usr/local/cpanel/base/3rdparty/squirrelmail/src/compose.php X-Source-Dir: :/base/3rdparty/squirrelmail/src X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Your index should be fine. You could use "luke" if you want to remove any dangling files not in use. Just run optimize again to fix it all up... You might want to allocate more memory that 175 though. Depending on your document sizes and how efficiently and fast you want lucene to work to index the data, you will want to give lucene plenty of memory to work with. Tony Schwartz tony@simpleobjects.com > Hello! I am using Lucene 1.4.3 > > I'm building a Lucene index, that will have about 25 million documents > when it is done. > I'm adding 250,000 at a time. > > Currently there is about 1.2Million in there, and I ran into a problem. > After I had added a batch of 250,000 I go a 'java.lang.outOfMemory' > threw by writer.optimize(); (a standard IndexWriter) > > The exception caused my program to quit out, and it didn't call > 'writer.close();' > > First, with it dying in the middle of an .optimize() is there any chance > my index is corrupted? > > Second, I know I can remove the /tmp/lucene*.lock file to remove the > lock in order to add more, but is it safe to do that? > > I've since figured out that I can pass -Xmx to the 'java' program in > order to increase the maximum amount of RAM. > It was using the default of 64M, I plan on increasing that to 175M to > start with. > That should solve the memory problems (I can allocate more if necessary > down the line). > > Lastly, when I go back, open it again, and add another 250,000 and then > call optimize again, will a failed previous optimize hurt the index at all? > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org