lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yuliya Palchaninava ...@solute.de>
Subject AW: Lucene 2.9 and 3.0: Optimized index is thrice as large as the not optimized index
Date Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:50:29 GMT
Otis,

thanks for the answer. 

Unfortunatelly the index *directory* remains larger *after" the optimization.
In our case the otimization was/is completed successfully and, as you say,
there is only one segment in the directory.

Some other ideas?

Thanks,
Yuliya

> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:otis_gospodnetic@yahoo.com] 
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 17:35
> An: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Lucene 2.9 and 3.0: Optimized index is thrice as 
> large as the not optimized index
> 
> Yuliya,
> 
> The index *directory* will be larger *while* you are 
> optimizing.  After the optimization is completed 
> successfully, the index directory will be smaller.  It is 
> possible that your index directory is large(r) because you 
> have some left-over segments (e.g. from some earlier 
> failed/interrupted optimizations) that are not really a part 
> of the index.  After optimizing, you should have only 1 
> segment, so if you see more than 1 segment, look at the ones 
> with older timestamps.  Those can be (re)moved.
> 
>  Otis
> --
> Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Solr - Lucene - Nutch
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Yuliya Palchaninava <yp@solute.de>
> > To: "java-user@lucene.apache.org" <java-user@lucene.apache.org>
> > Sent: Thu, January 7, 2010 11:23:08 AM
> > Subject: Lucene 2.9 and 3.0: Optimized index is thrice as 
> large as the 
> > not optimized index
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > According to the api documentation: "In general, once the optimize 
> > completes, the total size of the index will be less than 
> the size of 
> > the starting index. It could be quite a bit smaller (if there were 
> > many pending deletes) or just slightly smaller". In our 
> case the index 
> > becomes not smaller but larger, namely thrice as large.
> > 
> > The not optimized index doesn't contain compressed fields, 
> what could 
> > have caused the growth of the index due to the otimization. So we 
> > cannot explain what happens.
> > 
> > Does someone have an explanation for the index growth due 
> to the optimization?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Yuliya
> > 
> > 
> > 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> 
> 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message