That link appears to be foo'd, and I can't find the original doc. But others (mostly on the user's list historically) have seen very significant performance improvements with SSDs, *IF* the entire index doesn't fit in memory.
If your index does fit entirely in memory, there will probably be some improvement when fetching stored fields, especially if the stored fields are large. But I'm not sure the cost is worth the incremental speed in this case.. Of course if you can get your IT folks to spring for SSDs, go for it :) Best Erick On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Daniel Skiles <daniel.ski...@docfinity.com> wrote: > I haven't tried it with Solr yet, but with straight Lucene about two years > ago we saw about a 40% boost in performance on our tests with no changes > except the disk. > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Rich Cariens <richcari...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Ahoy ahoy! >> >> Does anyone have any experiences or stories they can share with the list >> about how SSDs impacted search performance for better or worse? >> >> I found a Lucene SSD performance benchmark >> doc< >> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/SSD_performance?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=combined-disk-ssd.pdf >> >but >> the wiki engine is refusing to let me view the attachment (I get "You >> are not allowed to do AttachFile on this page."). >> >> Thanks in advance! >> >
