t; From: Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 8:39 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Large Data Set Suggestions
>
> Hi Lance,
> This is one area we left open in DIH. What is the best way to handle this. On
> error
rom: Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 8:39 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Large Data Set Suggestions
Hi Lance,
This is one area we left open in DIH. What is the best way to handle this. On
error it should give up or continue w
essage-
> From: Noble Paul ??? ?? [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thu 11/6/2008 11:38 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Large Data Set Suggestions
>
> Hi Lance,
> This is one area we left open in DIH. What is the best way to handle
> this
Ideally, it would be a configuration option.
Also, it would be great to have a hook to log or process an exception.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Noble Paul ??? ?? [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 11/6/2008 11:38 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Large Data
Message-
> From: Steven Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 5:57 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Large Data Set Suggestions
>
>> In that case you may put the file in a mounted NFS directory or you
>> can serve it ou
error.
Lance
-Original Message-
From: Steven Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 5:57 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Large Data Set Suggestions
> In that case you may put the file in a mounted NFS directory or you
> can serve it ou
100X, not 10X. And with the index on NFS. Reading the input data from
NFS would be slower than local, but probably not 10X. --wunder
On 11/6/08 5:56 AM, "Steven Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's one option although someone else on the list mentioned that
> performance was 10x slower i
> In that case you may put the file in a mounted NFS directory
> or you can serve it out with an apache server.
That's one option although someone else on the list mentioned that
performance was 10x slower in their NFS experience.
Another option is to serve up the files via Apache and pull them
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Steven Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The performance of DIH is likely to be faster than SolrJ.
>> Because , it does not have the overhead of an http request.
>
> Understood. However, we may not have the option of co-locating the data
> to be injested with t
> The performance of DIH is likely to be faster than SolrJ.
> Because , it does not have the overhead of an http request.
Understood. However, we may not have the option of co-locating the data
to be injested with the Solr server.
> What is your data source? I am assuming it is xml.
Yes. Inco
The performance of DIH is likely to be faster than SolrJ. Because , it
does not have the overhead of an http request.
What is your data source? I am assuming it is xml. SolrJ cannot
directly index xml . You may need to read docs from xml before solrj
can index it.
--Noble
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at
Hi Fergus,
Does the 6.6m doc resides on a single box (node) or multiple boxes ? Do u use
distributed search ?
Regards,
Sourav
- Original Message -
From: Fergus McMenemie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Wed Nov 05 08:21:45 2008
Subject: Re: Large Da
>Greetings!
>
>I've been asked to do some indexing performance testing on Solr 1.3
>using large XML document data sets (10M-60M docs) with DIH versus SolrJ.
>
>
>Does anyone have any suggestions where I might find a good data set this
>size?
>
>I saw the wikipedia dump reference in the DIH wik
Greetings!
I've been asked to do some indexing performance testing on Solr 1.3
using large XML document data sets (10M-60M docs) with DIH versus SolrJ.
Does anyone have any suggestions where I might find a good data set this
size?
I saw the wikipedia dump reference in the DIH wiki, but tha
14 matches
Mail list logo
