OOM with 2.9

[eks dev <ek...@yahoo.co.uk>]

Hi,
We just upgraded to 2.9 and noticed some (to me) not expected OOM.

We use MMapDirectory and after upgrade, on exactly the same Index/machine/jvm/params/setup... we cannot start index as mapping screams "No memory"

any explanation why this could be the case?



      

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org

Re: OOM with 2.9

[Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>]

I would not expect a 2.9 IndexReader to consume more RAM.  Was this
definitely the case?  (It wasn't just a matter of other processes
taking up RAM).  If so, we should drill in to understand the root
cause / regression.

One thing you can do in 2.9 is IndexReader.setDisableFakeNorms(true),
to prevent allocation of the "fake" byte[maxDoc()] norms array, to
save RAM.

Mike

On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 7:22 AM, eks dev<ek...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We just upgraded to 2.9 and noticed some (to me) not expected OOM.
>
> We use MMapDirectory and after upgrade, on exactly the same Index/machine/jvm/params/setup... we cannot start index as mapping screams "No memory"
>
> any explanation why this could be the case?
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org