Nice Steve. Zeeshan Lakhani programmer | software engineer at @basho | org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | paperswelove.org twitter => @zeeshanlakhani
> On Apr 21, 2015, at 3:57 PM, Steve Garon <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jason, > > Comment the <filterCache .../> section in the bucket's solrconfig.xml and > restart riak. Now your queries will be fast again :-) > > > Steve > > On 21 April 2015 at 04:24, Zeeshan Lakhani <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > No real workaround other than what you described or looking into > config/fq-no-cache settings as mentioned in > http://lucidworks.com/blog/advanced-filter-caching-in-solr/ > <http://lucidworks.com/blog/advanced-filter-caching-in-solr/> and playing > around with those. > > Riak is now at 2.1.0. I hope that one of the next few point releases will see > the fix. > > > Zeeshan Lakhani > programmer | > software engineer at @basho | > org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | paperswelove.org > <http://paperswelove.org/> > twitter => @zeeshanlakhani > >> On Apr 21, 2015, at 4:11 AM, Jason Campbell <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> 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 <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hey Jason, >>> >>> We’re working on performance issues with YZ filter queries, e.g. >>> https://github.com/basho/yokozuna/issues/392 >>> <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 >>> <http://paperswelove.org/> >>> twitter => @zeeshanlakhani >>> >>>> On Apr 21, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Jason Campbell <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com >>>> <http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> riak-users mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com >>> <http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > <http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com> > >
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
