RE: What About the Performance When Retrieving at Indexing?

2009年12月16日 10:13:11 -0800

If you are not already doing so, share a single IndexSearcher instance among
searcher threads.
DIGY
-----Original Message-----
From: Li Bing [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 7:40 PM
To: Digy
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: What About the Performance When Retrieving at Indexing?
Dear Didy,
My solution is as follows.
1) Only one thread can index (write);
2) Multiple threads can retrieve (read).
Now the retrieval performance is fine. Do you think my solution is
correct? Any better solutions?
Best,
LB
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Digy <[email protected]> wrote:
> I remember that this was discussed in thread "Exceptions When Indexing
with
> Multi-threading" Oct 2009
> DIGY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Li Bing [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 11:46 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: What About the Performance When Retrieving at Indexing?
>
> Dear all,
>
> I just want to know what about the performance when retrieving while
> new data is being indexed if I do not manage the threads myself. It
> must be lower than retrieving an index which is not being updated,
> right? In my case, the retrieving can be processed after the indexing
> is done. It is really slow. Does Lucene solve the issue itself?
>
> Thanks again!
> LB
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Li Bing <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:26 PM
> Subject: How To Append and Synchronize Lucene Index?
> To: [email protected]
>
>
> Hi, all,
>
> I am using Lucene.NET to index data. Meanwhile, more new data is
> frequently added to the index. However, if so, the retrieval
> performance becomes much lower when new data is being added and
> indexed because the indexing (writing) thread must synchronize the
> retrieving (reading) threads.
>
> I use .NET locks to manage the threads myself. Is it necessary? Or
> Lucene can handle the synchronize itself?
>
> I would like to know if it is possible for me to append one portion of
> Lucene indexes to another one. If so, it is easy to replicate Lucene
> indexes and the writing and reading do not affect each other. Or any
> other solutions in this case?
>
> Thanks so much!
> LB
>
>

Reply via email to