Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > They are indeed Java options. The first two control the maximum and > starting heap sizes. NewRatio controls the relative size of the young and > old generations, making the young generation considerably larger than it is > by default. The others are garbage collector options. This seems to be a > good summary: > > http://www.petefreitag.com/articles/gctuning/ > > Here's the official Sun (Oracle) documentation on GC tuning: > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/gc-tuning-6-140523.html > Thank you Shawn! Those are exactly the documents that I need. Google should hire you to fill in the pages when someone searches for "java garbage collection". Interestingly, I just check and bing.com does list the Oracle page on the first pager of results. I shudder to think that I might have to switch search engines! -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On 10/28/2012 2:28 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: Warming doesn't seem to be a problem here -- all your warm times are zero, so I am going to take a guess that it may be a heap/GC issue. I would recommend starting with the following additional arguments to your JVM. Since I have no idea how solr gets started on your server, I don't know where you would add these: -Xmx4096M -Xms4096M -XX:NewRatio=1 -XX:+UseParNewGC -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled Thanks. I've added those flags to the Solr line that I use to start Solr. Those are Java flags, not Solr, correct? I'm googling the flags now, but I find it interesting that I cannot find a canonical reference for them. They are indeed Java options. The first two control the maximum and starting heap sizes. NewRatio controls the relative size of the young and old generations, making the young generation considerably larger than it is by default. The others are garbage collector options. This seems to be a good summary: http://www.petefreitag.com/articles/gctuning/ Here's the official Sun (Oracle) documentation on GC tuning: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/gc-tuning-6-140523.html Thanks, Shawn
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > Warming doesn't seem to be a problem here -- all your warm times are zero, > so I am going to take a guess that it may be a heap/GC issue. I would > recommend starting with the following additional arguments to your JVM. > Since I have no idea how solr gets started on your server, I don't know > where you would add these: > > -Xmx4096M -Xms4096M -XX:NewRatio=1 -XX:+UseParNewGC -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC > -XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled > Thanks. I've added those flags to the Solr line that I use to start Solr. Those are Java flags, not Solr, correct? I'm googling the flags now, but I find it interesting that I cannot find a canonical reference for them. > This allocates 4GB of RAM to java, sets up a larger than normal Eden space > in the heap, and uses garbage collection options that usually fare better in > a server environment than the default.Java memory management options are > like religion to some people ... I may start a flamewar with these > recommendations. ;) The best I can tell you about these choices: They made > a big difference for me. > Thanks. I will experiment with them empirically. The first step is to learn to read the debug info, though. I've been googing for days, but I must be missing something. Where is the information that I pasted in pastebin documented? > I would also recommend switching to a Sun/Oracle jvm. I have heard that > previous versions of Solr were not happy on variants like OpenJDK, I have no > idea whether that might still be the case with 4.0. If you choose to do > this, you probably have package choices in Ubuntu. I know that in Debian, > the package is called sun-java6-jre ... Ubuntu is probably something > similar. Debian has a CLI command 'update-java-alternatives' that will > quickly switch between different java implementations that are installed. > Hopefully Ubuntu also has this. If not, you might need the following > command instead to switch the main java executable: > > update-alternatives --config java > Thanks, I will take a look at the current Oracle JVM. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On 10/26/2012 9:41 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: On the dashboard of the GUI, it lists all the jvm arguments. Include those. Click Java Properties and gather the "java.runtime.version" and "java.specification.vendor" information. After one of the long update times, pause/stop your indexing application. Click on your core in the GUI, open Plugins/Stats, and paste the following bits with a header to indicate what each section is: CACHE->filterCache CACHE->queryResultCache CORE->searcher Thanks, Shawn Thank you Shawn. The information is here: http://pastebin.com/aqEfeYVA Warming doesn't seem to be a problem here -- all your warm times are zero, so I am going to take a guess that it may be a heap/GC issue. I would recommend starting with the following additional arguments to your JVM. Since I have no idea how solr gets started on your server, I don't know where you would add these: -Xmx4096M -Xms4096M -XX:NewRatio=1 -XX:+UseParNewGC -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled This allocates 4GB of RAM to java, sets up a larger than normal Eden space in the heap, and uses garbage collection options that usually fare better in a server environment than the default.Java memory management options are like religion to some people ... I may start a flamewar with these recommendations. ;) The best I can tell you about these choices: They made a big difference for me. I would also recommend switching to a Sun/Oracle jvm. I have heard that previous versions of Solr were not happy on variants like OpenJDK, I have no idea whether that might still be the case with 4.0. If you choose to do this, you probably have package choices in Ubuntu. I know that in Debian, the package is called sun-java6-jre ... Ubuntu is probably something similar. Debian has a CLI command 'update-java-alternatives' that will quickly switch between different java implementations that are installed. Hopefully Ubuntu also has this. If not, you might need the following command instead to switch the main java executable: update-alternatives --config java Thanks, Shawn
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > > Taking all the information I've seen so far, my bet is on either cache > warming or heap/GC trouble as the source of your problem. It's now specific > information gathering time. Can you gather all the following information > and put it into a web paste page, such as pastie.org, and reply with the > link? I have gathered the same information from my test server and created > a pastie example. http://pastie.org/5118979 > > On the dashboard of the GUI, it lists all the jvm arguments. Include those. > > Click Java Properties and gather the "java.runtime.version" and > "java.specification.vendor" information. > > After one of the long update times, pause/stop your indexing application. > Click on your core in the GUI, open Plugins/Stats, and paste the following > bits with a header to indicate what each section is: > CACHE->filterCache > CACHE->queryResultCache > CORE->searcher > > Thanks, > Shawn > Thank you Shawn. The information is here: http://pastebin.com/aqEfeYVA -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On 10/26/2012 7:16 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: I spoke too soon! Wereas three days ago when the index was new 500 records could be written to it in <3 seconds, now that operation is taking a minute and a half, sometimes longer. I ran optimize() but that did not help the writes. What can I do to improve the write performance? Even opening the Logging tab of the Solr instance is taking quite a long time. In fact, I just left it for 20 minutes and it still hasn't come back with anything. I do have an SSH window open on the server hosting Solr and it doesn't look overloaded at all: $ date && du -sh data/ && uptime && free -m Fri Oct 26 13:15:59 UTC 2012 578Mdata/ 13:15:59 up 4 days, 17:59, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.12, 0.22 total used free sharedbuffers cached Mem: 14980 3237 11743 0284 -/+ buffers/cache:729 14250 Swap:0 0 0 Taking all the information I've seen so far, my bet is on either cache warming or heap/GC trouble as the source of your problem. It's now specific information gathering time. Can you gather all the following information and put it into a web paste page, such as pastie.org, and reply with the link? I have gathered the same information from my test server and created a pastie example. http://pastie.org/5118979 On the dashboard of the GUI, it lists all the jvm arguments. Include those. Click Java Properties and gather the "java.runtime.version" and "java.specification.vendor" information. After one of the long update times, pause/stop your indexing application. Click on your core in the GUI, open Plugins/Stats, and paste the following bits with a header to indicate what each section is: CACHE->filterCache CACHE->queryResultCache CORE->searcher Thanks, Shawn
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
I spoke too soon! Wereas three days ago when the index was new 500 records could be written to it in <3 seconds, now that operation is taking a minute and a half, sometimes longer. I ran optimize() but that did not help the writes. What can I do to improve the write performance? Even opening the Logging tab of the Solr instance is taking quite a long time. In fact, I just left it for 20 minutes and it still hasn't come back with anything. I do have an SSH window open on the server hosting Solr and it doesn't look overloaded at all: $ date && du -sh data/ && uptime && free -m Fri Oct 26 13:15:59 UTC 2012 578Mdata/ 13:15:59 up 4 days, 17:59, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.12, 0.22 total used free sharedbuffers cached Mem: 14980 3237 11743 0284 -/+ buffers/cache:729 14250 Swap:0 0 0 -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: > Please consider never running "optimize". That should be called "force merge". > Thanks. I have been letting the system run for about two days already without an optimize. I will let it run a week, then merge to see the effect. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Please consider never running "optimize". That should be called "force merge". wunder On Oct 24, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Erick Erickson > wrote: >> Maybe you've been looking at it but one thing that I didn't see on a fast >> scan was that maybe the commit bit is the problem. When you commit, >> eventually the segments will be merged and a new searcher will be opened >> (this is true even if you're NOT optimizing). So you're effectively >> committing >> every 1-2 seconds, creating many segments which get merged, but more >> importantly opening new searchers (which you are getting since you pasted >> the message: Overlapping onDeckSearchers=2). >> >> You could pinpoint this by NOT committing explicitly, just set your >> autocommit >> parameters (or specify commitWithin in your indexing program, which is >> preferred). Try setting it at a minute or so and see if your problem goes >> away >> perhaps? >> >> The NRT stuff happens on soft commits, so you have that option to have the >> documents immediately available for search. >> > > > Thanks, Erick. I'll play around with different configurations. So far > just removing the periodic optimize command worked wonders. I'll see > how much it helps or hurts to run that daily or more or less frequent. > > > -- > Dotan Cohen > > http://gibberish.co.il > http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Maybe you've been looking at it but one thing that I didn't see on a fast > scan was that maybe the commit bit is the problem. When you commit, > eventually the segments will be merged and a new searcher will be opened > (this is true even if you're NOT optimizing). So you're effectively committing > every 1-2 seconds, creating many segments which get merged, but more > importantly opening new searchers (which you are getting since you pasted > the message: Overlapping onDeckSearchers=2). > > You could pinpoint this by NOT committing explicitly, just set your autocommit > parameters (or specify commitWithin in your indexing program, which is > preferred). Try setting it at a minute or so and see if your problem goes away > perhaps? > > The NRT stuff happens on soft commits, so you have that option to have the > documents immediately available for search. > Thanks, Erick. I'll play around with different configurations. So far just removing the periodic optimize command worked wonders. I'll see how much it helps or hurts to run that daily or more or less frequent. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Maybe you've been looking at it but one thing that I didn't see on a fast scan was that maybe the commit bit is the problem. When you commit, eventually the segments will be merged and a new searcher will be opened (this is true even if you're NOT optimizing). So you're effectively committing every 1-2 seconds, creating many segments which get merged, but more importantly opening new searchers (which you are getting since you pasted the message: Overlapping onDeckSearchers=2). You could pinpoint this by NOT committing explicitly, just set your autocommit parameters (or specify commitWithin in your indexing program, which is preferred). Try setting it at a minute or so and see if your problem goes away perhaps? The NRT stuff happens on soft commits, so you have that option to have the documents immediately available for search. Best Erick On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > I've got a script writing ~50 documents to Solr at a time, then > commiting. Each of these documents is no longer than 1 KiB of text, > some much less. Usually the write-and-commit will take 1-2 seconds or > less, but sometimes it can go over 60 seconds. > > During a recent time of over-60-second write-and-commits, I saw that > the server did not look overloaded: > > $ uptime > 14:36:46 up 19:20, 1 user, load average: 1.08, 1.16, 1.16 > $ free -m > total used free sharedbuffers cached > Mem: 14980 2091 12889 0233 1243 > -/+ buffers/cache:613 14366 > Swap:0 0 0 > > Other than Solr, nothing is running on this machine other than stock > Ubuntu Server services (no Apache, no MySQL). The machine is running > on an Extra Large Amazon EC2 instance, with a virtual 4-core 2.4 GHz > Xeon processor and ~16 GiB of RAM. The solr home is on a mounted EBS > volume. > > What might make some queries take so long, while others perform fine? > > Thanks. > > > -- > Dotan Cohen > > http://gibberish.co.il > http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:52 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > As soon as you make any change at all to an index, it's no longer > "optimized." Delete one document, add one document, anything. Most of the > time you will not see a performance increase from optimizing an index that > consists of one large segment and a bunch of very tiny segments or deleted > documents. > I've since realized that by experimentation. I've probably saved quite a few minutes of reading time by investing hours of experiment time! > How big is your index, and did you run this right after a reboot? If you > did, then the cache will be fairly empty, and Solr has only read enough from > the index files to open the searcher.The number is probably too small to > show up on a gigabyte scale. As you issue queries, the cached amount will > get bigger. If your index is small enough to fit in the 14GB of free RAM > that you have, you can manually populate the disk cache by going to your > index directory and doing 'cat * > /dev/null' from the commandline or a > script. The first time you do it, it may go slowly, but if you immediately > do it again, it will complete VERY fast -- the data will all be in RAM. > The cat trick to get the files in RAM is great. I would not have thought that would work for binary files. The index is small, much less than the available RAM, for the time being. Therefore, there was nothing to fill it with I now understand. Both 'free' outputs were after the system had been running for some time. > The 'free -m' command in your first email shows cache usage of 1243MB, which > suggests that maybe your index is considerably smaller than your available > RAM. Having loads of free RAM is a good thing for just about any workload, > but especially for Solr.Try running the free command without the -g so you > can see those numbers in kilobytes. > > I have seen a tendency towards creating huge caches in Solr because people > have lots of memory. It's important to realize that the OS is far better at > the overall job of caching the index files than Solr itself is. Solr caches > are meant to cache result sets from queries and filters, not large sections > of the actual index contents. Make the caches big enough that you see some > benefit, but not big enough to suck up all your RAM. > I see, thanks. > If you are having warm time problems, make the autowarm counts low. I have > run into problems with warming on my filter cache, because we have filters > that are extremely hairy and slow to run. I had to reduce my autowarm count > on the filter cache to FOUR, with a cache size of 512. When it is 8 or > higher, it can take over a minute to autowarm. > I will have to experiment with the warning. Thank you for the tips. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On 10/22/2012 3:11 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: First, stop optimizing. You do not need to manually force merges. The system does a great job. Forcing merges (optimize) uses a lot of CPU and disk IO and might be the cause of your problem. Thanks. Looking at the index statistics, I see that within minutes after running optimize that the stats say the index needs to be reoptimized. Though, the index still reads and writes fine even in that state. As soon as you make any change at all to an index, it's no longer "optimized." Delete one document, add one document, anything. Most of the time you will not see a performance increase from optimizing an index that consists of one large segment and a bunch of very tiny segments or deleted documents. Second, the OS will use the "extra" memory for file buffers, which really helps performance, so you might not need to do anything. This will work better after you stop forcing merges. A forced merge replaces every file, so the OS needs to reload everything into file buffers. I don't see that the memory is being used: $ free -g total used free sharedbuffers cached Mem:14 2 12 0 0 1 -/+ buffers/cache: 0 14 Swap:0 0 0 How big is your index, and did you run this right after a reboot? If you did, then the cache will be fairly empty, and Solr has only read enough from the index files to open the searcher.The number is probably too small to show up on a gigabyte scale. As you issue queries, the cached amount will get bigger. If your index is small enough to fit in the 14GB of free RAM that you have, you can manually populate the disk cache by going to your index directory and doing 'cat * > /dev/null' from the commandline or a script. The first time you do it, it may go slowly, but if you immediately do it again, it will complete VERY fast -- the data will all be in RAM. The 'free -m' command in your first email shows cache usage of 1243MB, which suggests that maybe your index is considerably smaller than your available RAM. Having loads of free RAM is a good thing for just about any workload, but especially for Solr.Try running the free command without the -g so you can see those numbers in kilobytes. I have seen a tendency towards creating huge caches in Solr because people have lots of memory. It's important to realize that the OS is far better at the overall job of caching the index files than Solr itself is. Solr caches are meant to cache result sets from queries and filters, not large sections of the actual index contents. Make the caches big enough that you see some benefit, but not big enough to suck up all your RAM. If you are having warm time problems, make the autowarm counts low. I have run into problems with warming on my filter cache, because we have filters that are extremely hairy and slow to run. I had to reduce my autowarm count on the filter cache to FOUR, with a cache size of 512. When it is 8 or higher, it can take over a minute to autowarm. Thanks, Shawn
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: > Lucene already did that: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3454 > > Here is the Solr issue: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3141 > > People over-use this regardless of the name. In Ultraseek Server, it was > called "force merge" and we had to tell people to stop doing that nearly > every month. > Thank you for those links. I commented on the Solr bug. There are some very insightful comments in there. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: > First, stop optimizing. You do not need to manually force merges. The system > does a great job. Forcing merges (optimize) uses a lot of CPU and disk IO and > might be the cause of your problem. > Thanks. Looking at the index statistics, I see that within minutes after running optimize that the stats say the index needs to be reoptimized. Though, the index still reads and writes fine even in that state. > Second, the OS will use the "extra" memory for file buffers, which really > helps performance, so you might not need to do anything. This will work > better after you stop forcing merges. A forced merge replaces every file, so > the OS needs to reload everything into file buffers. > I don't see that the memory is being used: $ free -g total used free sharedbuffers cached Mem:14 2 12 0 0 1 -/+ buffers/cache: 0 14 Swap:0 0 0 -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Michael Della Bitta wrote: > Has the Solr team considered renaming the optimize function to avoid > leading people down the path of this antipattern? If it were never the right thing to do, it could simply be removed. The problem is that it's sometimes the right thing to do - but it depends heavily on the use cases and trade-offs. The best thing is to simply document what it does and the cost of doing it. -Yonik http://lucidworks.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Lucene already did that: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3454 Here is the Solr issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3141 People over-use this regardless of the name. In Ultraseek Server, it was called "force merge" and we had to tell people to stop doing that nearly every month. wunder On Oct 22, 2012, at 1:39 PM, Michael Della Bitta wrote: > Has the Solr team considered renaming the optimize function to avoid > leading people down the path of this antipattern? > > Michael Della Bitta > > > Appinions > 18 East 41st Street, 2nd Floor > New York, NY 10017-6271 > > www.appinions.com > > Where Influence Isn’t a Game > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Walter Underwood > wrote: >> First, stop optimizing. You do not need to manually force merges. The system >> does a great job. Forcing merges (optimize) uses a lot of CPU and disk IO >> and might be the cause of your problem. >> >> Second, the OS will use the "extra" memory for file buffers, which really >> helps performance, so you might not need to do anything. This will work >> better after you stop forcing merges. A forced merge replaces every file, so >> the OS needs to reload everything into file buffers. >> >> wunder >> >> On Oct 22, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Mark Miller wrote: Perhaps you can grab a snapshot of the stack traces when the 60 second delay is occurring? You can get the stack traces right in the admin ui, or you can use another tool (jconsole, visualvm, jstack cmd line, etc) >>> Thanks. I've refactored so that the index is optimized once per hour, >>> instead after each dump of commits. But when I will need to increase >>> the optmize frequency in the future I will go through the stack >>> traces. Thanks! >>> >>> In any case, the server has an extra 14 GiB of memory available, how >>> might I make the best use of that for Solr assuming both heavy reads >>> and writes? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> -- >>> Dotan Cohen >>> >>> http://gibberish.co.il >>> http://what-is-what.com >> >> >> >> -- Walter Underwood wun...@wunderwood.org
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Has the Solr team considered renaming the optimize function to avoid leading people down the path of this antipattern? Michael Della Bitta Appinions 18 East 41st Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10017-6271 www.appinions.com Where Influence Isn’t a Game On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: > First, stop optimizing. You do not need to manually force merges. The system > does a great job. Forcing merges (optimize) uses a lot of CPU and disk IO and > might be the cause of your problem. > > Second, the OS will use the "extra" memory for file buffers, which really > helps performance, so you might not need to do anything. This will work > better after you stop forcing merges. A forced merge replaces every file, so > the OS needs to reload everything into file buffers. > > wunder > > On Oct 22, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Mark Miller wrote: >>> Perhaps you can grab a snapshot of the stack traces when the 60 second >>> delay is occurring? >>> >>> You can get the stack traces right in the admin ui, or you can use >>> another tool (jconsole, visualvm, jstack cmd line, etc) >>> >> Thanks. I've refactored so that the index is optimized once per hour, >> instead after each dump of commits. But when I will need to increase >> the optmize frequency in the future I will go through the stack >> traces. Thanks! >> >> In any case, the server has an extra 14 GiB of memory available, how >> might I make the best use of that for Solr assuming both heavy reads >> and writes? >> >> Thanks. >> >> -- >> Dotan Cohen >> >> http://gibberish.co.il >> http://what-is-what.com > > > >
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
First, stop optimizing. You do not need to manually force merges. The system does a great job. Forcing merges (optimize) uses a lot of CPU and disk IO and might be the cause of your problem. Second, the OS will use the "extra" memory for file buffers, which really helps performance, so you might not need to do anything. This will work better after you stop forcing merges. A forced merge replaces every file, so the OS needs to reload everything into file buffers. wunder On Oct 22, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Mark Miller wrote: >> Perhaps you can grab a snapshot of the stack traces when the 60 second >> delay is occurring? >> >> You can get the stack traces right in the admin ui, or you can use >> another tool (jconsole, visualvm, jstack cmd line, etc) >> > Thanks. I've refactored so that the index is optimized once per hour, > instead after each dump of commits. But when I will need to increase > the optmize frequency in the future I will go through the stack > traces. Thanks! > > In any case, the server has an extra 14 GiB of memory available, how > might I make the best use of that for Solr assuming both heavy reads > and writes? > > Thanks. > > -- > Dotan Cohen > > http://gibberish.co.il > http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Mark Miller wrote: > Perhaps you can grab a snapshot of the stack traces when the 60 second > delay is occurring? > > You can get the stack traces right in the admin ui, or you can use > another tool (jconsole, visualvm, jstack cmd line, etc) > Thanks. I've refactored so that the index is optimized once per hour, instead after each dump of commits. But when I will need to increase the optmize frequency in the future I will go through the stack traces. Thanks! In any case, the server has an extra 14 GiB of memory available, how might I make the best use of that for Solr assuming both heavy reads and writes? Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Perhaps you can grab a snapshot of the stack traces when the 60 second delay is occurring? You can get the stack traces right in the admin ui, or you can use another tool (jconsole, visualvm, jstack cmd line, etc) - Mark On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: >> On 10/22/2012 9:58 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: >>> >>> Thank you, I have gone over the Solr admin panel twice and I cannot find >>> the cache statistics. Where are they? >> >> >> If you are running Solr4, you can see individual cache autowarming times >> here, assuming your core is named collection1: >> >> http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/cache?entry=queryResultCache >> http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/cache?entry=filterCache >> >> The warmup time for the entire searcher can be found here: >> >> http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/core?entry=searcher >> >> > > Thank you Shawn! I can see how I missed that data. I'm reviewing it > now. Solr has a low barrier to entry, but quite a learning curve. I'm > loving it! > > I see that the server is using less than 2 GiB of memory, whereas it > is a dedicated Solr server with 16 GiB of memory. I understand that I > can increase the query and document caches to increase performance, > but I worry that this will increase the warm-up time to unacceptable > levels. What is a good strategy for increasing the caches yet > preserving performance after an optimize operation? > > Thanks. > > -- > Dotan Cohen > > http://gibberish.co.il > http://what-is-what.com -- - Mark
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > On 10/22/2012 9:58 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: >> >> Thank you, I have gone over the Solr admin panel twice and I cannot find >> the cache statistics. Where are they? > > > If you are running Solr4, you can see individual cache autowarming times > here, assuming your core is named collection1: > > http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/cache?entry=queryResultCache > http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/cache?entry=filterCache > > The warmup time for the entire searcher can be found here: > > http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/core?entry=searcher > > Thank you Shawn! I can see how I missed that data. I'm reviewing it now. Solr has a low barrier to entry, but quite a learning curve. I'm loving it! I see that the server is using less than 2 GiB of memory, whereas it is a dedicated Solr server with 16 GiB of memory. I understand that I can increase the query and document caches to increase performance, but I worry that this will increase the warm-up time to unacceptable levels. What is a good strategy for increasing the caches yet preserving performance after an optimize operation? Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On 10/22/2012 9:58 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: Thank you, I have gone over the Solr admin panel twice and I cannot find the cache statistics. Where are they? If you are running Solr4, you can see individual cache autowarming times here, assuming your core is named collection1: http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/cache?entry=queryResultCache http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/cache?entry=filterCache The warmup time for the entire searcher can be found here: http://server:port/solr/#/collection1/plugins/core?entry=searcher If you are on an older Solr release, everything is in various sections of the stats page. Do a page search for "warmup" multiple times to see them all: http://server:port/solr/corename/admin/stats.jsp Thanks, Shawn
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Mark Miller wrote: > Are you using Solr 3X? The occasional long commit should no longer > show up in Solr 4. > Thank you Mark. In fact, this is the production release of Solr 4. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Rafał Kuć wrote: > Hello! > > You can check if the long warming is causing the overlapping > searchers. Check Solr admin panel and look at cache statistics, there > should be warmupTime property. > Thank you, I have gone over the Solr admin panel twice and I cannot find the cache statistics. Where are they? > Lowering the autowarmCount should lower the time needed to warm up, > howere you can also look at your warming queries (if you have such) > and see how long they take. > Thank you, I will look at that! -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Are you using Solr 3X? The occasional long commit should no longer show up in Solr 4. - Mark On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: > I've got a script writing ~50 documents to Solr at a time, then > commiting. Each of these documents is no longer than 1 KiB of text, > some much less. Usually the write-and-commit will take 1-2 seconds or > less, but sometimes it can go over 60 seconds. > > During a recent time of over-60-second write-and-commits, I saw that > the server did not look overloaded: > > $ uptime > 14:36:46 up 19:20, 1 user, load average: 1.08, 1.16, 1.16 > $ free -m > total used free sharedbuffers cached > Mem: 14980 2091 12889 0233 1243 > -/+ buffers/cache:613 14366 > Swap:0 0 0 > > Other than Solr, nothing is running on this machine other than stock > Ubuntu Server services (no Apache, no MySQL). The machine is running > on an Extra Large Amazon EC2 instance, with a virtual 4-core 2.4 GHz > Xeon processor and ~16 GiB of RAM. The solr home is on a mounted EBS > volume. > > What might make some queries take so long, while others perform fine? > > Thanks. > > > -- > Dotan Cohen > > http://gibberish.co.il > http://what-is-what.com -- - Mark
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
Hello! You can check if the long warming is causing the overlapping searchers. Check Solr admin panel and look at cache statistics, there should be warmupTime property. Lowering the autowarmCount should lower the time needed to warm up, howere you can also look at your warming queries (if you have such) and see how long they take. -- Regards, Rafał Kuć Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch - ElasticSearch > When Solr is slow, I'm seeing these in the logs: > [collection1] Error opening new searcher. exceeded limit of > maxWarmingSearchers=2, try again later. > [collection1] PERFORMANCE WARNING: Overlapping onDeckSearchers=2 > Googling, I found this in the FAQ: > "Typically the way to avoid this error is to either reduce the > frequency of commits, or reduce the amount of warming a searcher does > while it's on deck (by reducing the work in newSearcher listeners, > and/or reducing the autowarmCount on your caches)" > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FAQ#What_does_.22PERFORMANCE_WARNING:_Overlapping_onDeckSearchers.3DX.22_mean_in_my_logs.3F > I happen to know that the script will try to commit once every 60 > seconds. How does one "reduce the work in newSearcher listeners"? What > effect will this have? What effect will reducing the autowarmCount on > caches have? > Thanks.
Re: Occasional Solr performance issues
When Solr is slow, I'm seeing these in the logs: [collection1] Error opening new searcher. exceeded limit of maxWarmingSearchers=2, try again later. [collection1] PERFORMANCE WARNING: Overlapping onDeckSearchers=2 Googling, I found this in the FAQ: "Typically the way to avoid this error is to either reduce the frequency of commits, or reduce the amount of warming a searcher does while it's on deck (by reducing the work in newSearcher listeners, and/or reducing the autowarmCount on your caches)" http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FAQ#What_does_.22PERFORMANCE_WARNING:_Overlapping_onDeckSearchers.3DX.22_mean_in_my_logs.3F I happen to know that the script will try to commit once every 60 seconds. How does one "reduce the work in newSearcher listeners"? What effect will this have? What effect will reducing the autowarmCount on caches have? Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com
