Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 51939 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2007 14:22:23 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Feb 2007 14:22:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 66444 invoked by uid 500); 10 Feb 2007 14:22:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 65478 invoked by uid 500); 10 Feb 2007 14:22:21 -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 65462 invoked by uid 99); 10 Feb 2007 14:22:21 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 06:22:21 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [206.190.38.61] (HELO web50307.mail.yahoo.com) (206.190.38.61) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 06:22:09 -0800 Received: (qmail 69340 invoked by uid 60001); 10 Feb 2007 14:21:48 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=YvgY7ka8aERR+sYhL23hyowtiRqV4ccMWg18Z31b79+Qrr9YzgYrLnuC8p1Qj/it/wJvpO/gHEDB6g4gJa5xiTJxD0I2q9BRMVYIYDKunvCUb0E0vD+KNVCUuSg2+af439x6cWT8WdTp8zJ9Xo07Urnzkk9eY74jXVSG/Yj8OsY=; X-YMail-OSG: eNWPu34VM1kIYnS..a8SdlinDntScOukH34qs0cfS.33qCiiHHu3j9qOtA.XIezs1VHCc.v6QF_TxJaIgT_4y_NWQm7SOLmFoyzc0PJ4m3e.7TrJBjMiJgzMW_b4mu8piHfUjkeVwMXLXv3YlJh.._xsfWFloY15.GJiam4bFSEiCiGgXN2NHCYpHMuW Received: from [58.63.154.47] by web50307.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 06:21:47 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/368.7 YahooMailWebService/0.6.132.7 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 06:21:47 -0800 (PST) From: Otis Gospodnetic Subject: Re: Merge factor problem, To: java-user@lucene.apache.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <956243.73583.qm@web50307.mail.yahoo.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Sairaj, see http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2003/03/05/lucene.html=0A=0A= Increase your maxBufferedDocs.=0A=0AOtis=0A=0A----- Original Message ----= =0AFrom: Sairaj Sunil =0ATo: java-user@lucene.apach= e.org=0ASent: Friday, February 9, 2007 11:14:50 AM=0ASubject: Merge factor = problem,=0A=0AHi all,=0AI have increased the merge factor from 10 to 50. I = thought the indexing=0Aperformance will be better. But the time taken taken= to index is more than=0Athe time taken for the merge factor of 10. The doc= umentation and some=0Aarticles say that the time taken to index will improv= e if the merge factor=0Ais increased.=0AI have changed the merge factors to= 50, 100, 1000. I have left the=0AminMergeDocs to be the default value for = all the cases. The time taken to=0Aindex same number of documents increased= in a linear fashion, which is=0Aexactly opposite according to the info I h= ave read.=0AIs this the correct behavior. In which cases this behavior happ= ens?=0A=0ARegards=0A-- =0ASairaj Sunil=0A=0A=0A --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org