lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Rodenburg <jeff.rodenb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: High CPU utilization with sort
Date Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:47:28 GMT
Why are numeric fields more onerous in filling the field-cache?



On 11/20/05, Yonik Seeley <yseeley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I haven't done measurements, but the first query with a sort on a
> particular field will involve filling the field-cache and that can
> take a while (especially for numeric fields).
>
> If you haven't already, you should compare the query times of a
> "warmed" searcher. Sorted queries will still take longer, but I
> haven't measured how much longer.
>
> -Yonik
> Now hiring -- http://forms.cnet.com/slink?231706
>
> On 11/20/05, Jeff Rodenburg <jeff.rodenburg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've read many comments from users on the list indicating that sorting
> > may/will be performance-heavy. Is high CPU utilization with a sorted
> search
> > one of the expected performance hits?
> >
> > In tests for our implementation (25 concurrent connections generating
> > search/sort requests), we've seen performance in terms of
> requests/second
> > drop by a factor of 10, compared to similar tests executing only search
> > requests (no sorts). CPU appears to be our bottleneck, and I'm trying to
> > determine if this is expected behavior or if we're outside the bounds of
> > typical performance.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > jeff
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message