Skip to main content.
home | support | download

Back to List Archive

Re: [swish-e] Date Range search oddity

From: Bela Gazdy <bela(at)>
Date: Wed Mar 04 2009 - 17:22:58 GMT
On Wed Mar  4 11:59:36 2009 (GMT) you, AKA Bill Moseley wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 07:17:03AM -0500, Bela Gazdy wrote:
> > 
> > Background:
> > 
> > swish-e-2.4.5 compiled on AIX 5.3 with gcc-3.3.2 (or native cc_r);
> > perl-5.8.2 (cc_r) with all the required modules.
> > 
> > Indexed hypermail (v. 2.1.7) archives in chunks, merged into one index file,
> > all indexing done with the same config parameters.
> > 
> > Symptom:
> > 
> > When searching for a string that has NO match in the entire index, i.e., when
> > selecting "Limit to: All", it returns the expected red "no results" message for
> > every "Limit to:" and "Date Range" selections as well; however,
> > 
> > When searching for a string for which "THERE IS" at least one document with a
> > match, i.e., the "Limit to: All" selection does return results, all other
> > "Limit to:" or "Date Range" selection for which "THERE IS NOT" a match in the 
> > specified date-interval, returns the error:
> > 
> > 	"Ran out of memory (could not allocate 0 more bytes)!"
> One has to wonder if that's the error message that's broken or if
> there's some code that's really thinks it needs to allocate zero
> bytes.  That is, did it really run out of memory or is it choking on
> the zero byte request?
> Do you have a lot of files?  The limit by range function is of
> questionable design.  It works by sorting the list of properties for
> all files twice, IIRC, and it may not scale well if you have a lot of
> items in the index.  And perhaps there's an assumption in the math
> used in that feature just doesn't work on AIX.
> I wonder how much slower it would be if you limited by date in the
> script.  That is, fetch all search results from swish, filter by date,
> and then trim to the specific page you want to display.

Thanks for chiming in, Bill. 

I do not believe that the error reflects real memory starvation, as it's a small
set of files (~150,000), and the same error occurs with only a handful of files,
also. It's got to be an AIX peculiarity :-)

You suggestion, to go around the problem, is possible in principle, but goes
beyond my capabilities.


Users mailing list
Received on Wed Mar 4 12:22:57 2009