lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jack Krupansky" <j...@basetechnology.com>
Subject Re: Partial update vs full update performance
Date Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:51:31 GMT
Correct.

Generally, I think most apps will benefit from partial update, especially if 
they have a lot of fields. Otherwise, they will have two round trip requests 
rather than one. Solr does the reading of existing document values more 
efficiently, under the hood, with no need to format for the response and 
parse the incoming (redundant) values.

OTOH, if the client has all the data anyway (maybe because it wants to 
display the data before update), it may be easier to do a full update.

You could do an actual performance test, but I would suggest that 
(generally) partial update will be more efficient than a full update.

And Lucene can do add and delete rather quickly, so that should not be a 
concern for modest to medium size documents, but clearly would be an issue 
for large and very large documents (hundreds of fields or large field 
values.)

-- Jack Krupansky

-----Original Message----- 
From: adfel70
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:40 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Partial update vs full update performance

Hi
As I understand, even if I use partial update, lucene can't really update
documents. Solr will use the stored fields in order to pass the values to
lucene, and a delete,add opeartions will still be performed.

If this is the case is there a performance issue when comparing partial
update to full update?

My documents have dozens of fields, most of them are not stored.
I sometimes need to go through a portion of the documents and modify a
single field.
What I do right now is deleting the portion I want to update, and adding
them with the updated field.
This of course takes a lot of time (I'm talking about ten of millions of
documents).

Should I move to using partial update? will it improve the indexing time at
all? will it improve the indexing time in such extent that I would better be
storing the fields I don't need stored just for the partial update feature?

thanks






--
View this message in context: 
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Partial-update-vs-full-update-performance-tp4069948.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. 


Mime
View raw message