Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <444FC0ED.4070602@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:50:21 -0700
From: Doug Cutting <cutting@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051013)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: RAM Directory / querying Performance issue
References: <20060426135051.4835.qmail@web60815.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060426135051.4835.qmail@web60815.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Is this markedly faster than using an MMapDirectory?  Copying all this 
data into the Java heap (as RAMDirectory does) puts a tremendous burden 
on the garbage collector.  MMapDirectory should be nearly as fast, but 
keeps the index out of the Java heap.

Doug

zzzzz shalev wrote:
> I've rewritten the RAM DIR to supprt 64 bit (still havent had time to add this to lucene, hopefully in the coming months when i have a free second)
>    
>   My question:
>    
>   i have a machine with 4 GB RAM
>    
>   i have a 3GB index file,
>    
>   i successfully load the 3GB index into memory,
>    
>   the first few queries run with normal response time,
>    
>   but very quickly response time becomes unbearably slow (webloading with 1 con user), 
>    
>   how are queries expanded in memory when run (how much memory do they use up)?
>    
>   could this be an issue of the queries themselves talking up large chunks of RAM?
>    
>    
>    
>    
>    
> 
> 		
> ---------------------------------
> Blab-away for as little as 1�/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

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