Hi Christopher, Thanks for the offer to share the details! All of the items really look interesting and I'd love to know more about what you found about each of them. At this point in time I'm mostly interested in performance, so how about these: Indexing performance gains,Size of index v's query performance. Memory usage of large indexes.
Also, if you happened to compare performance of search against indices sitting on a SAN vs. local disk (vs. NFS?), I'd love to hear about your findings. Thanks, Otis ----- Original Message ---- From: Christopher Triggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:49:25 PM Subject: Re: Overall performance: network v.s. SAN file system 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.
