Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: Lucene index on NFS
From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEY5pxVHOCg7EGf6=nTZ3Xp38ScUbyYVfQ-fCHQrXsfuTdpdZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:17:51 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F2F1B386-9B97-4DE9-8207-7D85093679FB@hoplahup.net>
References: 
 <CA+iFDpxF_B3qq_b-bx8iC+HevXC1Je9iKkiyFVvG0bL0Qgvbeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALr4HzqoUBa08jiABi7FfwfbtB22=x9dqWKn+7D_DEmfMSX1Rg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEY5pxVHOCg7EGf6=nTZ3Xp38ScUbyYVfQ-fCHQrXsfuTdpdZw@mail.gmail.com>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org

My experience in the Lucene 1.x times were a factor of at least four in =
writing to NFS and about two when reading from there. I'd discourage =
this as much as possible!

(rsync is way more your friend for transporting and replication =E0 la =
solr should also be considered)

paul


Le 2 oct. 2012 =E0 11:10, Ian Lea a =E9crit :

> You'll certainly need to factor in the performance of NFS versus local =
disks.
>=20
> My experience is that smallish low activity indexes work just fine on
> NFS, but large high activity indexes are not so good, particularly if
> you have a lot of modifications to the index.
>=20
> You may want to install a custom IndexDeletionPolicy.  See the
> javadocs for details with specific reference to NFS.
>=20
>=20
> --
> Ian.
>=20
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Vitaly Funstein <vfunstein@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>> How tolerant is your project of decreased search and indexing =
performance?
>> You could probably write a simple test that compares search and write
>> speeds of local and NFS-mounted indexes and make the decision based =
on the
>> results.
>>=20
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Jong Kim <jong.lucene@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>>=20
>>> Hi,
>>>=20
>>> According to the Lucene In Action (Second Edition), the section =
2.11.2
>>> "Accessing an index over a remote file system" explains that there =
are
>>> issues related to accessing a Lucene index across remote file system
>>> including NFS.
>>>=20
>>> I'm particuarly interested in NFS compatibility, and wondering if =
there has
>>> been any work done to solve or mitigate this problem. Has this issue =
been
>>> addressed? If not, are there some reliable work-arounds that make =
this
>>> possible at the expense of some sacrifice in other areas?
>>>=20
>>> Any information would be greatly appreciated, since my project =
heavily
>>> depends on the feasibility of this.
>>>=20
>>> Thanks
>>> /Jong
>>>=20
>=20
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>=20


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