Re: Which caches should use the solr.FastLRUCache

2009-06-04 Thread Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्
FastLRUCache is designed to be lock free so it is well suited for
caches which are hit several times in a request. I guess there is no
harm in using FastLRUCache across all the caches.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:22 AM, Robert Purdy rdpu...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hey there,

 Anyone got any advice on which caches (filterCache, queryResultCache,
 documentCache, fieldValueCache) should be implemented using the
 solr.FastLRUCache in solr 1.4 and what are the pros  cons
 vs the solr.LRUCache.

 Thanks Robert.
 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://www.nabble.com/Which-caches-should-use-the-solr.FastLRUCache-tp23860182p23860182.html
 Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.





-- 
-
Noble Paul | Principal Engineer| AOL | http://aol.com


Re: Which caches should use the solr.FastLRUCache

2009-06-04 Thread Yonik Seeley
2009/6/4 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍  नोब्ळ् noble.p...@corp.aol.com:
 FastLRUCache is designed to be lock free so it is well suited for
 caches which are hit several times in a request. I guess there is no
 harm in using FastLRUCache across all the caches.

Gets are cheaper, but evictions are more expensive.  If the cache hit
rate is low, the old synchronized cache may be faster, unless you have
a ton of CPUs... not sure where the crossover point is though.

-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com


Re: Which caches should use the solr.FastLRUCache

2009-06-04 Thread Robert Purdy

Thanks for the Good information :) Well I haven't had any evictions in any of
the caches in years, but the hit ratio is 0.51 in queryResultCache, 0.77 in
documentCache, 1.00 in the fieldValueCache, and 0.99 in the filterCache. So
in your opinion should the documentCache and queryResultCache use the old
way on a single CPU quad core machine? 

Also right now I have all caches using the solr.FastLRUCache (tried with
both the cleanupThread = false or true) and I have noticed some queries that
are taking 53 ms on a freshly warmed new searcher (when nothing else is
querying the slave), but when the slave is busy the same query, that should
be using the caches, is sometimes taking 8 secs? Any thoughts?

Thanks Robert.


Yonik Seeley-2 wrote:
 
 2009/6/4 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍  नोब्ळ् noble.p...@corp.aol.com:
 FastLRUCache is designed to be lock free so it is well suited for
 caches which are hit several times in a request. I guess there is no
 harm in using FastLRUCache across all the caches.
 
 Gets are cheaper, but evictions are more expensive.  If the cache hit
 rate is low, the old synchronized cache may be faster, unless you have
 a ton of CPUs... not sure where the crossover point is though.
 
 -Yonik
 http://www.lucidimagination.com
 
 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Which-caches-should-use-the-solr.FastLRUCache-tp23860182p23874898.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



Re: Which caches should use the solr.FastLRUCache

2009-06-04 Thread Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Robert Purdy rdpu...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks for the Good information :) Well I haven't had any evictions in any of
 the caches in years, but the hit ratio is 0.51 in queryResultCache, 0.77 in
 documentCache, 1.00 in the fieldValueCache, and 0.99 in the filterCache. So
 in your opinion should the documentCache and queryResultCache use the old
 way on a single CPU quad core machine?

 Also right now I have all caches using the solr.FastLRUCache (tried with
 both the cleanupThread = false or true) and I have noticed some queries that
 are taking 53 ms on a freshly warmed new searcher (when nothing else is
 querying the slave), but when the slave is busy the same query, that should
 be using the caches, is sometimes taking 8 secs? Any thoughts?

This overhead may not be because of the cache itself. Some queries are
definitely missing the cache and they are likely to take time.  if
cleanupThread=true, then no eviction should take more time

 Thanks Robert.


 Yonik Seeley-2 wrote:

 2009/6/4 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍  नोब्ळ् noble.p...@corp.aol.com:
 FastLRUCache is designed to be lock free so it is well suited for
 caches which are hit several times in a request. I guess there is no
 harm in using FastLRUCache across all the caches.

 Gets are cheaper, but evictions are more expensive.  If the cache hit
 rate is low, the old synchronized cache may be faster, unless you have
 a ton of CPUs... not sure where the crossover point is though.

 -Yonik
 http://www.lucidimagination.com



 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://www.nabble.com/Which-caches-should-use-the-solr.FastLRUCache-tp23860182p23874898.html
 Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.





-- 
-
Noble Paul | Principal Engineer| AOL | http://aol.com


Which caches should use the solr.FastLRUCache

2009-06-03 Thread Robert Purdy

Hey there, 

Anyone got any advice on which caches (filterCache, queryResultCache,
documentCache, fieldValueCache) should be implemented using the
solr.FastLRUCache in solr 1.4 and what are the pros  cons 
vs the solr.LRUCache.

Thanks Robert.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Which-caches-should-use-the-solr.FastLRUCache-tp23860182p23860182.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.