From java-user-return-53177-apmail-lucene-java-user-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Tue Jul 10 03:00:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C5ED3D929 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 03:00:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 73344 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jul 2012 03:00:05 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 73062 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jul 2012 03:00:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 73045 invoked by uid 99); 10 Jul 2012 03:00:05 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 03:00:05 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=FSL_RCVD_USER,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of vfunstein@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.176 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.176] (HELO mail-lb0-f176.google.com) (209.85.217.176) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 02:59:57 +0000 Received: by lboj14 with SMTP id j14so19677973lbo.35 for ; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 19:59:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=l/6tTQTJs7pJbbF2E5z/RY4KRfgjGRBMsQtxg1U6YlU=; b=PUGbtMp7V6Uflr15aXGuAHpGVAbRlIyVChQS3Zn9GQ2zCVb/kGUWWVLcDevGG+2QNo qj9EM0Z2dcjANtyK4WZ60bBZ68lkohJn3i/O9Gf7/wMuoE+nDGmwt9Yzte9wGq1hl8YS RJ/woh+dU4eKWbwg9rMShrpvKzo9wui64mdXRIYo1mzZ+0KU/dWVYVqSl4pTbHKbOVDR yH+kRrIupm3xCwis4lWB64ro4SSiRlmvQN+FVa/MinalzVjdUX1wFjq/W8ZpUNc9+nwA Ebpi5iWn2Thy22wep+mM+yXWpY+pPN766nHpo/F9pD0D36/XibwxlDX6Ac3P/WQb7EAV ZdCw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.125.236 with SMTP id mt12mr42761573lab.12.1341889177157; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 19:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.16.67 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 19:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 19:59:37 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Direct memory footprint of NIOFSDirectory From: Vitaly Funstein To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04426e90bb7f2804c470eb48 --f46d04426e90bb7f2804c470eb48 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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 --f46d04426e90bb7f2804c470eb48--