lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lance Norskog <>
Subject Re: Direct memory footprint of NIOFSDirectory
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:34:26 GMT
You can choose another directory implementation.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Vitaly Funstein <> wrote:
> Just thought I'd bump this. To clarify - for reasons outside my
> control, I can't just run the JVM hosting Lucene-enabled application
> with -XX:MaxDirectMemorySize=100G or some other huge value for the
> ceiling and never worry about this. Due to preallocation and other
> restrictions, this parameter has to be fairly close to the actual size
> used by the app (padded for Lucene and possibly other consumers).
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Vitaly Funstein <> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I have recently run into the situation when there was not a sufficient amount of
direct memory available for IndexWriter to work. This was essentially caused by the embedding
application making heavy use of JVM's direct memory buffers and not leaving enough headroom
for NIOFSDirectory to operate. So what are the approximate guidelines, if any, in terms of
JVM configuration for this choice of Directory to operate safely? Basically, what I am looking
for is a rough estimate of direct memory usage per GB of indexed data, or per directory/writer
instance, if applicable.
>> Thanks,
>> -V
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Lance Norskog

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message