Yonik Seeley wrote:
>
> Compound was a *lot* slower indexing in past versions of Lucene...
>
I've noticed the difference with Lucene 2.4.1 and Solr 1.3 of ~40% speed
improvement on a RHEL 5.1 system while processing a fresh index of ~500,000
files by turning of the compound file.
However, if
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The example solrconfig.xml has useCompoundFile as false both in the
> indexDefault as well as in mainIndex section. Should we change that?
Compound was a *lot* slower indexing in past versions of Lucene...
It's prob
: The example solrconfig.xml has useCompoundFile as false both in the
: indexDefault as well as in mainIndex section. Should we change that?
I don't think so -- the "default" is carried over from Lucene, where it's
the default because there's no idea of how it will be used, and Compound
is hte
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Chris Hostetter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> SolrIndexConfig.java shows "useCompoundFile = true" as the defualt ... are
> you seeing something different getting used as the default somewhere?
>
The example solrconfig.xml has useCompoundFile as false both in the
i
: 1. Using the compound file format drops the number of file descriptors
: needed. Any other benefits?
not that i know of.
: 2. Indexing may be slower. What about query performance?
If i remember correctly it's a little slower, but "a little" may be
inconsequential.
: 3. Since Lucene 1.4, the
