Re: Why the query performance is so different for queries?
Stop running 32-bit operating systems. You'll never get good performance with a toy like that. --wunder On Sep 29, 2010, at 8:18 PM, newsam wrote: > Thanks for your reply. > > Our box is win server 2003 (32bits) and 6G RAM totally. Large heap (>2G) may > not be helpful for JVM in 32bits box. Therefore we set JAVA_OPTIONS to > "-Xms521m -Xmx1400m". Is my understanding right? > > Thanks. > >> From: Lance Norskog >> Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org, newsam >> Subject: Re: Why the query performance is so different for queries? >> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:13:20 -0700 >> >> How much ram does the JVM have? >> >> Wildcard queries are slow. Starting with '*' are even slower. If you >> want all values try "field:[* TO *]". This is a range query and lets >> you pick a range of values- this picks everything. >> >> The "*:*" is not a wildcard. It is a magic syntax for "all documents" >> and does not cause a search. >> >> 2010/9/28 newsam > : >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> I have posted a thread "The search response time is too long". >>> >>> >>> The SOLR searcher instance is deployed with Tomcat 5.5.21. >>> . >>> The index file is 8.2G. The doc num is 6110745. DELL Server has Intel(R) >>> Xeon(TM) CPU (4 cores) 3.00GHZ and 6G RAM. >>> >>> In SOLR back-end, "query=key:*" costs almost 60s while "query=*:*" only >>> needs 500ms. Another case is "query=product_name_title:*", which costs 7s. >>> I am confused about the query performance. Do you have any suggestions? >>> >>> btw, the cache setting is as follows: >>> >>> filterCache: 256, 256, 0 >>> queryResultCache: 1024, 512, 128 >>> documentCache: 16384, 4096, n/a >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lance Norskog >> goks...@gmail.com >> -- Walter Underwood Venture ASM, Troop 14, Palo Alto
Re: Why the query performance is so different for queries?
Thanks for your reply. Our box is win server 2003 (32bits) and 6G RAM totally. Large heap (>2G) may not be helpful for JVM in 32bits box. Therefore we set JAVA_OPTIONS to "-Xms521m -Xmx1400m". Is my understanding right? Thanks. >From: Lance Norskog >Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org, newsam >Subject: Re: Why the query performance is so different for queries? >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:13:20 -0700 > >How much ram does the JVM have? > >Wildcard queries are slow. Starting with '*' are even slower. If you >want all values try "field:[* TO *]". This is a range query and lets >you pick a range of values- this picks everything. > >The "*:*" is not a wildcard. It is a magic syntax for "all documents" >and does not cause a search. > >2010/9/28 newsam : >> Hi guys, >> >> I have posted a thread "The search response time is too long". >> >> >> The SOLR searcher instance is deployed with Tomcat 5.5.21. >> . >> The index file is 8.2G. The doc num is 6110745. DELL Server has Intel(R) >> Xeon(TM) CPU (4 cores) 3.00GHZ and 6G RAM. >> >> In SOLR back-end, "query=key:*" costs almost 60s while "query=*:*" only >> needs 500ms. Another case is "query=product_name_title:*", which costs 7s. I >> am confused about the query performance. Do you have any suggestions? >> >> btw, the cache setting is as follows: >> >> filterCache: 256, 256, 0 >> queryResultCache: 1024, 512, 128 >> documentCache: 16384, 4096, n/a >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> > > > >-- >Lance Norskog >goks...@gmail.com >
Re: Why the query performance is so different for queries?
How much ram does the JVM have? Wildcard queries are slow. Starting with '*' are even slower. If you want all values try "field:[* TO *]". This is a range query and lets you pick a range of values- this picks everything. The "*:*" is not a wildcard. It is a magic syntax for "all documents" and does not cause a search. 2010/9/28 newsam : > Hi guys, > > I have posted a thread "The search response time is too long". > > > The SOLR searcher instance is deployed with Tomcat 5.5.21. > . > The index file is 8.2G. The doc num is 6110745. DELL Server has Intel(R) > Xeon(TM) CPU (4 cores) 3.00GHZ and 6G RAM. > > In SOLR back-end, "query=key:*" costs almost 60s while "query=*:*" only needs > 500ms. Another case is "query=product_name_title:*", which costs 7s. I am > confused about the query performance. Do you have any suggestions? > > btw, the cache setting is as follows: > > filterCache: 256, 256, 0 > queryResultCache: 1024, 512, 128 > documentCache: 16384, 4096, n/a > > Thanks. > > > -- Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com
Why the query performance is so different for queries?
Hi guys, I have posted a thread "The search response time is too long". The SOLR searcher instance is deployed with Tomcat 5.5.21. . The index file is 8.2G. The doc num is 6110745. DELL Server has Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU (4 cores) 3.00GHZ and 6G RAM. In SOLR back-end, "query=key:*" costs almost 60s while "query=*:*" only needs 500ms. Another case is "query=product_name_title:*", which costs 7s. I am confused about the query performance. Do you have any suggestions? btw, the cache setting is as follows: filterCache: 256, 256, 0 queryResultCache: 1024, 512, 128 documentCache: 16384, 4096, n/a Thanks.
