Re: Overall performance: network v.s. SAN file system

[Christopher Triggs]

Hi, I have not done any comparisons with Solr but have done some with another enterprise search engine. Are you looking for performance data or architecture? Some of the things I looked at was: Indexing performance gains, Size of index v's query performance. Memory usage of large indexes. Reducing freshness of a redundant node by sharing the index, Fail-over mechanism. If any of these items interest you I will be happy to share some detail. Regards, Triggsie Otis Gospodnetic wrote: I don't think anyone replied to this, but maybe now, two months since Lance's email, somebody has done some comparisons? I'm curious, too. Otis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simpy -- http://www.simpy.com/ - Tag - Search - Share ----- Original Message ---- From: Lance Norskog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 6:28:27 PM Subject: Overall performance: network v.s. SAN file system Is anyone doing Solr installations with a SAN file system? Like IBM Storage Tank or Apple XSAN or Red Hat GFS? What are your experiences? Thanks, Lance -- Christopher Triggs ABN:   24 544 055 144 Phone:   0410 614 620 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.