Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 46004 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2008 09:25:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Dec 2008 09:25:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 11245 invoked by uid 500); 20 Dec 2008 09:25:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 11200 invoked by uid 500); 20 Dec 2008 09:25:44 -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 11188 invoked by uid 99); 20 Dec 2008 09:25:44 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 01:25:44 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.4 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.218.16] (HELO mail-bw0-f16.google.com) (209.85.218.16) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:25:35 +0000 Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so3867553bwz.5 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 01:25:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.126.145 with SMTP id c17mr3519104fas.102.1229765113503; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 01:25:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.103.210 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Dec 2008 01:25:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9ac0c6aa0812200125j6686dcdcn975bcf77056843ff@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 04:25:13 -0500 From: "Michael McCandless" To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Default and optimal use of RAMDirectory In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_60950_28744869.1229765113496" References: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_60950_28744869.1229765113496 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Actually, things have improved since LIA1 was written a few years ago: IndexWriter now does a good job managing the RAM buffer you assign to it, so you should not see much benefit by doing your own buffering with RAMDirectory (and if you somehow do, I'd like to know about it!). Instead you should call IndexWriter.setRAMBufferSizeMB. Also, FSDirectory does no RAM buffering on its own. See here for further ways to tune for indexing throughput: http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ImproveIndexingSpeed Mike wrote: > > Hi all, > > First of I'd like to say I'm quite pleased to be a part of this mailing > list - its even more exciting to know that we have Otis G. and Erik H., > authors of (at least in my opinion) the Lucene Bible - Lucene in Action, > actively answering all these inquiries =) > > We're currently in the initial stages of implementing lucene as part of our > product and one problem that we need to resolve is optimizing lucene. I've > been reading Lucene in Action book and one of the tips for optimizing > lucene indexing is by using RAMDirectory as a buffer before writing to > FSDirectory. According to the book, this is done internally and > automatically when I use FSDirectory. My questions are 1.) What's the > default implementation/ computation used in allocating RAMdirectory when we > implement FSDirectory and 2.) What's the optimal way of customizing > RAMDirectory usage - any tips on how to do it. > > BTW, we're using Lucene 2.3.2 > > Thanks for all the help > > Joseph > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > ------=_Part_60950_28744869.1229765113496--