lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From v.se...@lombardodier.com
Subject Re: optimize with num segments > 1 index keeps growing
Date Thu, 21 Jul 2011 15:50:52 GMT
hi,
closing after the 2 segments optimize does not change it.
also I am running with lucene 3.1.0. 
cheers,
vince









Ian Lea <ian.lea@gmail.com> 
 
 
21.07.2011 17:30
Please respond to
java-user@lucene.apache.org



To
java-user@lucene.apache.org
cc

Subject
Re: optimize with num segments > 1 index keeps growing






A write.lock file with timestamp of 13:58 is in all the listings. The
first thing I'd try is to add some IndexWriter.close() calls.


--
Ian.



On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 4:05 PM,  <v.sevel@lombardodier.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> here is a concrete example.
>
> I am starting with an index that has 19017236 docs, which takes 58989 Mb
> on disk:
>
> 21.07.2011  15:21                20 segments.gen
> 21.07.2011  15:21             2'974 segments_2acy4
> 21.07.2011  13:58                 0 write.lock
> 16.07.2011  02:21    33'445'798'886 _52aho.fdt
> 16.07.2011  02:21       178'723'932 _52aho.fdx
> 16.07.2011  01:58             5'002 _52aho.fnm
> 16.07.2011  03:10     9'857'410'889 _52aho.frq
> 16.07.2011  03:10     4'538'234'846 _52aho.prx
> 16.07.2011  03:10        61'581'767 _52aho.tii
> 16.07.2011  03:10     5'505'039'790 _52aho.tis
> 21.07.2011  01:01         1'899'536 _52aho_5.del
> 21.07.2011  01:05     4'222'206'034 _6t61z.fdt
> 21.07.2011  01:05        21'424'556 _6t61z.fdx
> 21.07.2011  01:01             5'002 _6t61z.fnm
> 21.07.2011  01:12     1'170'370'187 _6t61z.frq
> 21.07.2011  01:12       598'373'388 _6t61z.prx
> 21.07.2011  01:12         7'574'912 _6t61z.tii
> 21.07.2011  01:12       678'766'206 _6t61z.tis
> 21.07.2011  13:46     1'458'592'058 _7d6me.cfs
> 21.07.2011  13:48        15'702'654 _7dhgz.cfs
> 21.07.2011  13:52        16'800'942 _7dphm.cfs
> 21.07.2011  13:55        16'714'431 _7dxht.cfs
> 21.07.2011  14:24        17'505'435 _7e0wz.cfs
> 21.07.2011  14:24         5'875'852 _7e0xu.cfs
> 21.07.2011  14:48        18'340'470 _7e1x5.cfs
> 21.07.2011  15:19        16'978'564 _7e3ck.cfs
> 21.07.2011  15:21         1'208'656 _7e3hv.cfs
> 21.07.2011  15:21            19'361 _7e3hw.cfs
>              28 File(s) 61'855'156'350 bytes
>
> I am doing a delete of some of the older documents. after the delete, I
> commit then I optimize down to 2 segments. at the end of the optimize 
the
> index contains 18702510 docs (314727 were deleted) and it takes now 
58975
> Mb on disk:
>
> 21.07.2011  15:37                20 segments.gen
> 21.07.2011  15:37               524 segments_2acy6
> 21.07.2011  13:58                 0 write.lock
> 16.07.2011  02:21    33'445'798'886 _52aho.fdt
> 16.07.2011  02:21       178'723'932 _52aho.fdx
> 16.07.2011  01:58             5'002 _52aho.fnm
> 16.07.2011  03:10     9'857'410'889 _52aho.frq
> 16.07.2011  03:10     4'538'234'846 _52aho.prx
> 16.07.2011  03:10        61'581'767 _52aho.tii
> 16.07.2011  03:10     5'505'039'790 _52aho.tis
> 21.07.2011  15:23         1'999'945 _52aho_6.del
> 21.07.2011  15:31     5'194'848'138 _7e3hy.fdt
> 21.07.2011  15:31        28'613'668 _7e3hy.fdx
> 21.07.2011  15:25             5'002 _7e3hy.fnm
> 21.07.2011  15:37     1'529'771'296 _7e3hy.frq
> 21.07.2011  15:37       726'582'244 _7e3hy.prx
> 21.07.2011  15:37         8'518'198 _7e3hy.tii
> 21.07.2011  15:37       763'213'144 _7e3hy.tis
>              18 File(s) 61'840'347'291 bytes
>
> as you can see, size on disk did not really change. at this point I
> optimize down to 1 segment and at the end the index takes 48273 Mb on
> disk:
>
> 21.07.2011  16:46                20 segments.gen
> 21.07.2011  16:46               278 segments_2acy8
> 21.07.2011  13:58                 0 write.lock
> 21.07.2011  16:06    32'901'423'750 _7e3hz.fdt
> 21.07.2011  16:06       149'582'052 _7e3hz.fdx
> 21.07.2011  15:42             5'002 _7e3hz.fnm
> 21.07.2011  16:46     8'608'541'177 _7e3hz.frq
> 21.07.2011  16:46     4'392'616'115 _7e3hz.prx
> 21.07.2011  16:46        50'571'856 _7e3hz.tii
> 21.07.2011  16:46     4'515'914'658 _7e3hz.tis
>              10 File(s) 50'618'654'908 bytes
>
>
> this means that with the 1 segment optimize I was able to reclaim 10 Gb 
on
> disk that the 2 segments optimize could not achieve.
>
> how can this be explained? is that a normal behavior?
>
> thanks,
>
> vince
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Simon Willnauer <simon.willnauer@googlemail.com>
>
>
> 20.07.2011 23:11
> Please respond to
> java-user@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
> To
> java-user@lucene.apache.org
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: optimize with num segments > 1 index keeps growing
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:00 PM,  <v.sevel@lombardodier.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I index several millions small documents per day. each day, I remove
> some
>> of the older documents to keep the index at a stable number of
> documents.
>> after each purge, I commit then I optimize the index. what I found is
> that
>> if I keep optimizing with max num segments = 2, then the index keeps
>> growing on the disk. but as soon as I optimize with just 1 segment, the
>> space gets reclaimed on the disk. so, I have currently adopted the
>> following strategy : every night I optimize with 2 segments, except 
once
>> per week where I optimize with just 1 segment.
>
> what do you mean by keeps growing. you have n segments and you
> optimize down to 2 and the index is bigger than the one with n
> segments?
>
> simon
>>
>> is that an expected behavior?
>> I guess I am doing something special because I was not able to 
reproduce
>> this behavior in a unit test. what could it be?
>>
>> it would be nice to get some explanatory services within the product to
>> help get some understanding on its behavior. something that tells you
> some
>> information about your index for instance (number of docs in the
> different
>> states, how the space is being used, ...). lucene is a wonderful
> product,
>> but to me this is almost like black magic, and when there is a specific
>> behavior, I have got little clues to figure out something by myself.
> some
>> user oriented logging would be nice as well (the index writer info
> stream
>> is really verbose and very low level).
>>
>> thanks for your help,
>>
>>
>> Vince

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




************************ DISCLAIMER ************************
This message is intended only for use by the person to
whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is
privileged and confidential. Its content does not
constitute a formal commitment by Lombard Odier
Darier Hentsch & Cie or any of its branches or affiliates.
If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
kindly notify the sender immediately and destroy this
message. Thank You.
*****************************************************************

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