Lucene and memcached
gblock at ctoforaday.com
Sun Dec 12 02:14:01 PST 2004
On 12 Dec 2004, at 01:01, Ryan Boyce wrote:
> I have a question regarding lucene and memcached. After switching from
> searching via SQL (fulltext indexes) to Lucene, I have noticed a
> considerable amount of CPU time being used by my servers. I would like
> to implement memcached on top of Lucene to relieve some of this load
> off my app servers. Almost 80% of queries a day are redundant and
> aren’t being cached. Is there a way I can use memcache to cache my
> lucene queries?
If you can build a way to create a hash representing a query, you can
cache the full results of the query.
However: You're probably much, much better off spending some time
optimising the way you query in the first place. Lucene has a complex
relationship between search performance, searchers, and some of the
objects which, while you *can* instantiate copies each time, having
good performance requires that you keep around.
Assuming, of course, that you're probably doing what everyone does
first time around: creating index Readers and Searchers on each
request, and not using any of the cacheable representations of those
That's your first port of call.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 1245 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/memcached/attachments/20041212/5ea3a782/attachment.bin
More information about the memcached