Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 36726 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2008 14:29:00 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2008 14:29:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 9820 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2008 14:28:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 9790 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2008 14:28:52 -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 9779 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2008 14:28:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:28:52 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of cambazz@gmail.com designates 64.233.166.182 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.166.182] (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.182) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:27:54 +0000 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id z74so1886008pyg.9 for ; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:28:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=ZrCe7MQcdbjfN3J0fF827pDQXEpUnMzqMCDxaaN0+5U=; b=qcR6aW1Dm2kDHmHwsBEKOAzDi/MdJpziAWx8usJMXbImdFamqkgU4A1Vwk/L8Sv0AF JA4f4HaugooVMRrsXt/lmaL9QjB4flUIfruzqDkTa/FiUA+fDaJCD5pAF5QYDFILlKfV QItfHGW0N0h4jJTcA8iLTJmP4/rkChxK9Z++w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=hZYMUO64Xl/NalA1wEqtM2oN6+OawTIiDvFRpBmSdGWfBM2tc/tBaEZrUTvlgHwKdD D59oL6d8Jojre5bneFDF7HmTo/+jorGrtGuybcctRk4tXhjUS7PrHoNHQ57SyMoUVuy4 ttRnjmZYD7y00UPWl4OG+OiBp7OYUEso4VVYg= Received: by 10.141.161.6 with SMTP id n6mr5736758rvo.155.1220538503931; Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.176.5 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Sep 2008 07:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1bcb7c7f0809040728s69ca8379he784af672ce1088c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:28:23 +0300 From: "Cam Bazz" To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: lucene ram buffering MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_50955_17206699.1220538503892" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_50955_17206699.1220538503892 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline hello, I was reading the performance optimization guides then I found : writer.setRAMBufferSizeMB() combined with: writer.setMaxBufferedDocs(IndexWriter.DISABLE_AUTO_FLUSH); this can be used to flush automatically so if the ram buffer size is over a certain limit it will flush. now the question: i would like to manage all flushes myself. yet, i still need a large ram buffer (for search performance) how can I set ram buffer size to a large value, yet dont use auto flush. I just want to flush every 32 documents added - and manage that myself. if the ram buffer size is high, but we have a small number of documents, does lucene try to write the entire contents of the ram buffer - thus resulting in a higher flush time? usually in oodbms systems, you use a larger ram buffer for search, and a smaller ram buffer for write optimization. the reason being is a smaller ram buffer is writable to disk faster. is that the case with lucene? Best. -C.B. ------=_Part_50955_17206699.1220538503892--