Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 67217 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2006 11:15:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Jun 2006 11:15:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 36457 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2006 11:15:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 35825 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2006 11:15:32 -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 35814 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jun 2006 11:15:32 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 04:15:32 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [212.4.36.66] (HELO mail.agderweb.no) (212.4.36.66) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 04:15:30 -0700 Received: from lettmelk [212.4.54.130] by mail.agderweb.no with ESMTP (SMTPD-8.22) id A0BE0414; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:58:06 +0200 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:14:54 +0200 To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: IndexSearcher in Servlet Reply-To: aleksander.stensby@integrasco.no From: "Aleksander M. Stensby" Organization: Integrasco A/S Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-15 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <200606271432.k5REWFAp009750@smtp-ft3.fr.colt.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.00 (Win32) X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0626-1, 27.06.2006), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Declude-Sender: aleksander.stensby@integrasco.no [212.4.54.130] X-Declude-Spoolname: D60be0a3400000249.smd X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N As far as i know, an IndexSearcher use an IndexReader.. Hence you can do searcher.getIndexReader().. even tho you instanciated the searcher with a string path or a directory. So, i would guess that by creating a searcher with an indexreader as parameter, the constructor will be faster. But, what do I know:) On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:53:54 +0200, heritrix.lucene wrote: > Is there any difference in terms of speed between IndexReader and > IndexSearcher?? > > > > On 6/27/06, Erik Hatcher wrote: >> >> >> On Jun 27, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Fabrice Robini wrote: >> > That's also my case... >> > I create a new IndexSearcher at each query, but with a static and >> > instanciated Directory. >> > >> > New IndexSearcher(myDirectory) >> > >> > It seems to be OK... am I wrong ? >> >> You may be "ok" given your query patterns, but you won't benefit from >> Lucene internal caching unless you use a single IndexSearcher (or >> IndexReader, as just pointed out). >> >> Erik >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org >> >> -- Aleksander M. Stensby Software Developer Integrasco A/S aleksander.stensby@integrasco.no Tlf.: +47 41 22 82 72 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org