lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Willnauer <>
Subject Re: MemoryIndex in Lucene 4.x
Date Mon, 15 Jul 2013 14:06:42 GMT

can you share your benchmark and/or tell us a little more about how your
data looks like and how you analyze the data. There might be analysis
changes that contribute to that?


On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:56 PM, cischmidt77 <> wrote:

>  I use Lucene/MemoryIndex for a large number of queries against data in a
> streaming system. I'm looking to upgrade from v3.5 to 4.x, but it seems
> that
> using MemoryIndex is roughly 25% slower based on a benchmark I built using
> our internal queries and a sample of 1000 documents to run against. I
> haven't seen any benchmarks in the mailing list or anyone talking about a
> slowdown and am wondering if the classes used in 3.x are contributing to
> what I see. Are there any known classes that should not be used with Lucene
> 4.x? Perhaps a different QueryParser to make more efficient queries to run
> against the MemoryIndex, or Analyzers that shouldn't be used?
>  If the MemoryIndex *is* slower now, would moving to a RAMDirectory and
> batching queries be a better choice? I've been using MemoryIndex based on
> the javadoc description for some time, but need to see better performance
> before moving up to 4.x.
> Thanks,
>  Chris
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message