Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of markrmiller@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.92.27 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:mime-version:subject:date
         :references;
        b=MUWW/8aoiLPAa4EKTkqE7+SIA/DDQNm8aCtW2aNk6tDrz1TVGUdQ9/xjNeAggGlKev
         c4DlBgiEMED3BU6zMvwWLo3HRsNSB7aPwqXv9VsU2qGUfikrK7w+/+3qfO9BetPRV80o
         uL+gJPYmoE+LnYUosh5Ow/adO34K5qTeNHLzg=
Message-Id: <1D8230C0-B327-454E-8039-531C246FE315@gmail.com>
From: Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
To: "java-user@lucene.apache.org" <java-user@lucene.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <25695093.post@talk.nabble.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii;
	format=flowed;
	delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7A400)
Subject: Re: Lucene 2.9 and performance of readers per segment.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 04:55:32 -0400
References: <25695093.post@talk.nabble.com>

Per segment over many segments is actually a bit faster for none sort  
cases and many sort cases -but an optimized index will still be  
fastest - the speed benifit of many segments comes when reopening - so  
say for realtime search - in that case you may want to sac the opt  
perf for a segment tail that is faster on update turnaround time. But  
for straight search speed - optimized is still the the way to go.

- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com (mobile)

On Oct 1, 2009, at 4:47 AM, Marc Sturlese <marc.sturlese@gmail.com>  
wrote:

>
> Hey there,
> Until now when using Lucene 2.4 I was always optimizing my index using
> compound file after updating it. I was doing that because if not I  
> could
> feel a lot performance loss in search responses.
> Now in Lucene 2.9 there are per segment readers and I have read  
> something
> about it performes better and maybe there's no need to optimze  
> always the
> index.
> For FieldCache usage I know in Lucene 2.9 due to the per segment  
> readers the
> seed at loading time as imporved a lot if the index is not  
> optimized. But if
> it is optimized the loading time is the same.
> So, is that true that with per segment reders search request perform  
> almost
> as good as an optimized index? Can anyone point me where to get more
> information about the Lucene 2.9 per segments reader?
> Thanks in advance
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Lucene-2.9-and-performance-of-readers-per-segment.-tp25695093p25695093.html
> Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org