lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anshul jain <>
Subject Re: Lucene Performance issue
Date Wed, 21 Jan 2009 18:30:54 GMT
@Erick: Yes I changed the default field, it is "bagofwords" now.

@Ian: Yes both indexes were optimized, and I didn't do any deletions.
version 2.4.0

 I'll repeat the experiment, just be sure.
Mean while, do you have any document on Lucene fields? what I need to know
is how lucene is storing field information in posting list and how it is
used while searching.


On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Ian Lea <> wrote:

> > ...
> > I can for sure say that multiple copies are not index. But the number of
> > fields in which text is divided are many. Can that be a reason?
> Not for that amount of difference.  You may be sure that you are not
> indexing multiple copies, but I'm not.  Convince me - create 2 new
> indexes via the 2 methods, from scratch, and count the number of docs.
>  And verify the size of the indexes.  Does the multi GB one contain
> deleted docs?  Has it been optimized?
> > How is field data stored in Index and searched? I read the document on
> file
> > formats on lucene's web site but it was not very clear.
> All I need to know is that searching is extremely fast.  Have you
> taken note of Erick's suggestions and comments?
> What version of lucene are you using?
> --
> Ian.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Anshul Jain

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message