Thanks Zeeshan for the info. Is there a workaround in the mean time, or is the only option to handle queries to the individual nodes ourselves?
Is there a planned timeframe for the 2.0.1 release? Thanks, Jason > On 21 Apr 2015, at 16:13, Zeeshan Lakhani <zlakh...@basho.com> wrote: > > Hey Jason, > > We’re working on performance issues with YZ filter queries, e.g. > https://github.com/basho/yokozuna/issues/392, and coverage plan > generation/caching, and our CliServ team has started doing a ton of > benchmarks as well. > > You can bypass YZ, but then you’d have to create a way to generate your own > coverage plans and other things involving distributed solr that YZ gives you. > Nonetheless, we’re actively working on improving these issues you’ve > encountered. > > Zeeshan Lakhani > programmer | > software engineer at @basho | > org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | paperswelove.org > twitter => @zeeshanlakhani > >> On Apr 21, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Jason Campbell <xia...@xiaclo.net> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I'm currently trying to debug slow YZ queries, and I've narrowed down the >> issue, but not sure how to solve it. >> >> First off, we have about 80 million records in Riak (and YZ), but the >> queries return relatively few (a thousand or so at most). Our query times >> are anywhere from 800ms to 1.5s. >> >> I have been experimenting with queries directly on the Solr node, and it >> seems to be a problem with YZ and the way it does vnode filters. >> >> Here is the same query, emulating YZ first: >> >> { >> "responseHeader":{ >> "status":0, >> "QTime":958, >> "params":{ >> "q":"timestamp:[1429579919010 TO 1429579921010]", >> "indent":"true", >> "fq":"_yz_pn:55 OR _yz_pn:40 OR _yz_pn:25 OR _yz_pn:10", >> "rows":"0", >> "wt":"json"}}, >> "response":{"numFound":80,"start":0,"docs":[] >> }} >> >> And the same query, but including the vnode filter in the main body instead >> of using a filter query: >> >> { >> "responseHeader":{ >> "status":0, >> "QTime":1, >> "params":{ >> "q":"timestamp:[1429579919010 TO 1429579921010] AND (_yz_pn:55 OR >> _yz_pn:40 OR _yz_pn:25 OR _yz_pn:10)", >> "indent":"true", >> "rows":"0", >> "wt":"json"}}, >> "response":{"numFound":80,"start":0,"docs":[] >> }} >> >> I understand there is a caching benefit to using filter queries, but a >> performance difference of 100x or greater doesn't seem worth it, especially >> with a constant data stream. >> >> Is there a way to make YZ do this, or is the only way to query Solr >> directly, bypassing YZ? Does anyone have any other suggestions of how to >> make this faster? >> >> The timestamp field is a SolrTrieLongField with default settings if anyone >> is curious. >> >> Thanks, >> Jason >> _______________________________________________ >> riak-users mailing list >> riak-users@lists.basho.com >> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
