FAQ

On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 03:42:35PM -0600, robert engels wrote:
If your index can fit in the IO cache, you should using a completely
different implementation...

You should be writing a sequential transaction log for add/update/
delete operations, and storing the entire index in memory
(RAMDirectory) - with periodic background flushes of the log.
That'll work too.
If you are running multiple processes (in KS), who is invoking them
(inetd or similar?), if not, and users are on the system, you can't
control what will happen with the IO cache...
See LUCENE-1458.

Marvin Humphrey


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

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 5 of 22 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
categorieslucene
postedJan 9, '09 at 7:12p
activeJan 19, '09 at 5:33p
posts22
users10
websitelucene.apache.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase