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 BC69B10D16 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 05:32:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 96637 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jun 2014 05:32:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 96573 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jun 2014 05:32:10 -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 96562 invoked by uid 99); 6 Jun 2014 05:32:10 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jun 2014 05:32:10 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of manjula53@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.170 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.217.170] (HELO mail-lb0-f170.google.com) (209.85.217.170) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jun 2014 05:32:06 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f170.google.com with SMTP id w7so1204441lbi.15 for ; Thu, 05 Jun 2014 22:31:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=G8RvzdSIV7mSjbPSGxoa7TGahcGE7GqZrUKtB4UPjWs=; b=P0nZQNwrhSvjBy7KRtI0ZYj+r+ApmsNtxg9HZTcKQETFxsOETCDeksR7hr4Y7uu2Yp D0nzlAUYkyAb0A0sZjzP5Zzl7M/yIL57TA7pPlhwN71nvoPK6JbwZEySd/qYVyx0aYyy nc6MXaKk8dwph+4/sjGqBu7HWYkr2wJnSRh1ffaIHqpEsoKBaWO7FGa51MKOwih8aqMk OG2xJw8RkfyeWo5fVo3R3z6RLBNoRwwZedD4V3jNY3Tfvs3Z3zquSKNQRCK/r/97p9C6 FM1XaCMH1tl96ei3LvDGVyRZsPEe9LxMj4ui+3BoY7I9YowTQ+F/rDXnEUImr64ldm7U Mhjg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.147.135 with SMTP id tk7mr1724246lbb.11.1402032704841; Thu, 05 Jun 2014 22:31:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.201.135 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 22:31:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 11:01:44 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is it wrong to create index writer on each query request. From: Manjula Wijewickrema To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3a89ae55edef04fb242dea X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b3a89ae55edef04fb242dea Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, What are the other disadvantages (other than the time factor) of creating index for every request? Manjula. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Aditya wrote: > Hi Rajendra > > You should NOT create index writer for every request. > > >>Whether it is time consuming to update index writer when new document > will come. > No. > > Regards > Aditya > www.findbestopensource.com > > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Rajendra Rao > > wrote: > > > I have system in which documents and Query comes frequently .I am > > creating index writer in memory every time for each query I request . I > > want to know Is it good to separate Index Writing and loading and Query > > request ? Whether It is good to save index writer on hard disk .Whether > it > > is time consuming to update index writer when new document will come. > > > --047d7b3a89ae55edef04fb242dea--