Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 36095 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2009 12:38:49 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Nov 2009 12:38:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 75401 invoked by uid 500); 27 Nov 2009 10:49:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 75321 invoked by uid 500); 27 Nov 2009 10:49:27 -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 75311 invoked by uid 99); 27 Nov 2009 10:49:27 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:49:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of istvan.soos@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.224 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.224] (HELO mail-fx0-f224.google.com) (209.85.220.224) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:49:19 +0000 Received: by fxm24 with SMTP id 24so1227353fxm.11 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 02:48:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=WckNhuLbtMM8o0kVuOQ0lp2nCXOVpZmH7E+RQfrDbEY=; b=rBTOLG+MleIoVBQvrfjbINuo9uAalcGWV1mE3AVzvKBmhFO8F/zaLvV1upZjxlXQxw e+mAD5+wVN1J+x0m4iDj0BnWM4v8fqe+oYcc9A0WP9InXYD5MR3I0SrLG82w8CzQVAZT gXZxj0XunC4FWwStYaSAvAx9Ybka+WWyfdQzM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=tZcwR9hupncZ817MwBhkB0ZrFDnKLbDJJ6ZmWR2Qmo/yceACJX02DTKczO2yGf9npc UltikrTaXhbKUv08pBPchkDlZ5Ndx4qtQI91hlHzf+jrWz+x5ptshpTp2uXp05YELQn5 +ZUTIxSQkTHdnjJm1LBOF8iNRjr2NY+h6FJTw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.53.149 with SMTP id m21mr124377fag.101.1259318939304; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 02:48:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <9ac0c6aa0911270237w4929254dp702cdda50548f603@mail.gmail.com> References: <7ac523660911270123p6f16a385rfafd5b80307ccd90@mail.gmail.com> <9ac0c6aa0911270237w4929254dp702cdda50548f603@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:48:59 +0100 Message-ID: <7ac523660911270248n1b6af210u944d2d238e945bda@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: best practice on too many files vs IO overhead From: Istvan Soos To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Michael McCandless wrote: > Are you sure you're closing all readers that you're opening? Absolutely. :) (okay, never say this, but I had bugz because of this previously so I'm pretty sure that one is ok). > It's surprising with normal usage of Lucene that you'd run out of > descriptors, with its default mergeFactor (have you increased the > mergeFactor)? Default merge factor. (on Mac, the default maxfiles is 256, however I've run out of descriptors event at 10240, if I hadn't called optimize). > You can also enable compound file, which uses far fewer file > descriptors, at some cost to indexing performance. I thought this is the default but I'll check... > Also, a partial optimize (ie optimize(N)) does less IO but still > substantially reduces segment count of the index. I wasn't aware of this, thanks, I'll try it! Regards, Istvan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org