lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "qi wu" <chee...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Serving remote lucene client - RMI vs HTTP
Date Mon, 16 Jul 2007 02:43:12 GMT
Hi Kumar,
I am also interested in this question. I have used simple HTTP POST/GET request with open
search,and it requires about extra 15ms for  transferring search results between two machines.And
want to know whether RMI can give a better performance.

Thanks
-Qi
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kumarlimbu" <kumarlimbu@gmail.com>
To: <java-user@lucene.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 10:10 AM
Subject: Serving remote lucene client - RMI vs HTTP


> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> We are using lucene,nutch and spring framework to create a specialized
> search engine. Due to growing traffic we are trying to scale. By doing some
> tests we found out that the bottle neck was lucene search. We used some
> heavy traffic simulation and logged the time taken by each portion of the
> server response and found out that the bulk of the time was spent in
> searching from lucene index.
> 
> In order to accomodate higher traffic we are planning on splitting our
> application in 2 portions:
> 1. Web application (on 1 machine)
> 2. Search application (one more than 1 machine)
> 
> Each one of the application will reside on a (possibly) separate machines.
> We are looking forward to scaling by adding more than 1 machine dedicated to
> searching as lucene search seems to be the bottleneck. 
> 
> Web application will provide the front-end to the user. All static pages,
> images and the style information will reside on this machine. It will also
> serve dynamic pages but all the searching will take place on the search
> application. Web application will send search parameters to the search
> application and after searching, it will send back the results to the web
> application which will format it and display it to the user.
> 
> What we are unable to decide is whether to use RMI (
> http://www.soft-amis.com/index.html?return=http://www.soft-amis.com/cluster4spring/index.html
> cluster4spring  )or simple HTTP POST/GET request with response in XML
> format. We did some research and found out that RMI (with clustering
> support) might be more suitable for our needs. Unfortunately our team is not
> familiar with RMI and so we don't know if there will be any issues with it
> during implementation. 
> Advantage of using simple GET/POST is we have more control which searcher
> app to use and when. An important criteria for us is to disable searching
> from the searcher app who's index is being updated. This is very important
> for us. Is there anyway in RMI to inform the web (client) application that a
> particular server is unavailable (due to index being updated).
> 
> We would also like to know if anybody has implemented lucene searching in a
> similar fashion. Thanks for your help.
> 
> Kumar Limbu
> 
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Serving-remote-lucene-client---RMI-vs-HTTP-tf4084167.html#a11608209
> Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Mime
View raw message