Re: Query is timing out.

: 3TB approximately. Thanks, Modassar On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:15 PM Modassar Ather wrote: > Hi, > > The boolean query with a bigger value for *rows *times out with the > following message. > > The request took too long to iterate over terms. Timeout: timeoutAt > > S

Query is timing out.

Hi, The boolean query with a bigger value for *rows *times out with the following message. The request took too long to iterate over terms. Timeout: timeoutAt Solr version : Solr 8.6.3 Time allowed : 30 Field : Query : fl:(term1 OR term2 OR . OR term1) rows : 1 wt : json/phps

Index size issue. Migration from Solr-6.5.1 To Solr-8.6.3

Hi, I am in a process of migrating from Solr-6.5.1 To Solr-8.6.3. The current index size after optimisation is 2.4 TB. We use a 7TB disk for indexing as the optimization needs extra space. Now with the newer Solr the un-optimised index itself got created of size 5+TB which after optimisation

Re: Solr migration related issues.

t_ process to use > the names assigned by Solr. If it’s just for aesthetics, there’s really no > good way to change what’s in the drop-down. > > Best, > Erick > > > On Nov 5, 2020, at 5:25 AM, Modassar Ather > wrote: > > > > Hi Shawn, > > > > I understan

Re: Solr migration related issues.

: > On 11/4/2020 9:32 PM, Modassar Ather wrote: > > Another thing: how can I control the core naming? I want the core name to > > be *mycore* instead of *mycore**_shard1_replica_n1*/*mycore* > > *_shard2_replica_n2*. > > I tried setting it using property.name=*mycore* but it

Re: Solr migration related issues.

rote: > inline > > > On Nov 4, 2020, at 2:17 AM, Modassar Ather > wrote: > > > > Thanks Erick and Ilan. > > > > I am using APIs to create core and collection and have removed all the > > entries from core.properties. Currently I am facing init failure and >

Re: Solr migration related issues.

of. > >> > >> Scripting manual creation of core.properties files in order > >> to define your collections has never been officially supported, it > >> just happened to work. > >> > >> Best, > >> Erick > >> > >>> On

Re: Solr migration related issues.

this manually instead of using the collections API? > You can precisely place each replica with that API in a way that’ll > be continued to be supported going forward. > > This really sounds like an XY problem, what is the use-case you’re > trying to solve? > > Best, > Eri

Solr migration related issues.

Hi, I am migrating from Solr 6.5.1 to Solr 8.6.3. As a part of the entire upgrade I have the first task to install and configure the solr with the core and collection. The solr is installed in SolrCloud mode. In Solr 6.5.1 I was using the following key values in core.properties file. The

Re: Need help on handling large size of index.

; If you are running in SolrCloud mode and you are using the embedded > zookeeper I would change that. Solr and ZK are very chatty with each other, > run ZK on machines in proximity to Solr. > > Regards > > > On May 21, 2020, at 2:46 AM, Modassar Ather > wrote: > > >

Re: Need help on handling large size of index.

servers how much effect it may have on search response time. Best, Modassar On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 2:16 PM Modassar Ather wrote: > Thanks Phill for your response. > > Optimal Index size: Depends on what you are optimizing for. Query Speed? > Hardware utilization? > We

Re: Need help on handling large size of index.

We are not using zookeeper ensemble but would like to move to it sooner. Best, Modassar On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 9:19 AM Shawn Heisey wrote: > On 5/20/2020 11:43 AM, Modassar Ather wrote: > > Can you please help me with following few questions? > > > > - What is the ideal inde

Need help on handling large size of index.

Hi, Currently we have index of size 3.5 TB. These index are distributed across 12 shards under two cores. The size of index on each shards are almost equal. We do a delta indexing every week and optimise the index. The server configuration is as follows. - Solr Version : 6.5.1 - AWS

Re: Restrict search on term/phrase count in document.

Thanks for your replies. The requirement is basically to avoid documents which may have a match but with very less number of term or phrase in it. May a be 1/2 matches. The user is interested in those document which has matched term/phrase beyond a certain number. This can be a valid

Restrict search on term/phrase count in document.

Hi, Is there a way to restrict search with a term/phrase occurring n number of times in it? For example, find the documents which has a term/phrase 5 or more times in them. The "Terms component" seems to provide a way but not sure how it will work for complex queries. Please note that the Solr

Re: get all tokens from TokenStream in my custom filter

Hi, Are you getting the string but further tokens are not generated? If this is the case I think no need to end or close the stream in filter. Hope this helps. Best, Modassar On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 1:20 AM, kumar gaurav wrote: > Hi > > I need to get full field value from

Re: Influencing representing document in grouped search.

Thanks Alessandro for your suggestion. I tried few queries around results collapsing but I am not able to get the required result. What I want is just to get representing document from any grouped result based on certain field. E.g. There are results which belong to genre A/B/C/D and each grouped

Influencing representing document in grouped search.

Hi, Can grouped search result influenced in such a way that the representing document of a particular group is chosen based on some other field? Normally it is the score which defines the document as a group representing document or the group.sort parameter value plays the role. E.g. For a

Re: Need guidance for distributing data base on date interval in a collection

Hi Rehman, You may want to look into how the documents are routed on different shards. For that you can look into following documentation. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Shards+and+Indexing+Data+in+SolrCloud Basically it is the id of the document which when prefixed with

Query complexity scorer.

Hi, I am trying to find possible complexity of a query heuristically/ based on learning and provide a score to it before it is actually sent to Solr for execution. The query may contain wildcards, complex phrases, phrases with wildcards. The approach is to assign a number to each part of a query

Re: Split words with period in between ("Co.Ltd") into separate tokens

Hi, The flags set in your WordDelimiterFilterFactory definition is 0. You can try with generateWordParts=1 and splitOnCaseChange=1 and see if it breaks as per your requirement. You can also try with other available flags enabled. Best, Modassar On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Derek Poh

Re: Predicting query execution time.

Thanks Shawn for your suggestions. Best, Modassar On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 10/11/2016 11:46 PM, Modassar Ather wrote: > > We see queries executing in less than a second and taking minutes to > > execute as wel

Predicting query execution time.

Hi, We see queries executing in less than a second and taking minutes to execute as well. We need to predict the approximate time a query might take to execute. Need your help in finding the factors to be considered and calculating an approximate execution time. Thanks, Modassar

Query validation before the parser.

Hi, Queries like wildcards are expensive in terms of execution time and resources. Also there could be possible errors in user entered queries. I am trying to write a query validation feature which checks for wrong grouping, not supported fields, special characters in query without escaping. The

Difference in boolean query parsing. Solr-5.4.0 VS Solr.6.1.0

Hi, During migration from Solr-5.4.1 to Solr-6.1.0 I saw a difference in the behavior of few of my boolean queries. As per my current understanding the default operator comes in when there is no operator present in between two terms. Also both the ANDed terms are marked mandatory if not, any of

Re: Regarding HTMLStripCharFilter.

Hi, Please provide your inputs. Thanks, Modassar On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Kindly help me understand the way HTMLStripCharFilter works. > > I have following analysis chain. > > int flags = WordDelimite

Regarding HTMLStripCharFilter.

Hi, Kindly help me understand the way HTMLStripCharFilter works. I have following analysis chain. int flags = WordDelimiterFilter.GENERATE_WORD_PARTS | WordDelimiterFilter.GENERATE_NUMBER_PARTS | WordDelimiterFilter.CATENATE_WORDS | WordDelimiterFilter.CATENATE_NUMBERS

Re: edismax - Regex query.

Please read the last example in my previous mail as follows: *Query: fl1:/netw.{0,4}/* "parsedquery_toString": "+fl1:/netw.{0,4}/" Basically the regex query is getting analyzed only for alias fields. Thanks, Modassar On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Modassar Ather <

Re: edismax - Regex query.

/" Regards, Modassar On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Erik Hatcher <erik.hatc...@gmail.com> wrote: > “f.fl.qf” is not a recognized Solr parameter. Please provide the full > (debug=true) response from Solr so we can see how the query is being parsed. > > E

Difference in performance of faceting.

Hi, Please help me understand if there is any benefit of using number faceting over String faceting? Thanks, Modassar

Re: edismax - Regex query.

Hi, Any input will be really helpful. Regards, Modassar On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kindly provide your inputs. > > Thanks, > Modassar > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com

Re: edismax - Regex query.

Kindly provide your inputs. Thanks, Modassar On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a qf defined as follows: > > *fl1 fl2 fl3 fl4* > These are all text fields. > > When I query *fl:/netw.{0,4}/ *I see

edismax - Regex query.

Hi, I have a qf defined as follows: *fl1 fl2 fl3 fl4* These are all text fields. When I query *fl:/netw.{0,4}/ *I see the parsed query contains all the possible analyzed tokens of the query where as for query *fl1:/netw.{0,4}/ *it parses the query as expected to *fl1:/netw.{0,4}/*. Please let

Re: Results of facet differs with change in facet.limit.

1 PM, Toke Eskildsen <t...@statsbiblioteket.dk> wrote: > On Mon, 2016-05-02 at 15:53 +0530, Modassar Ather wrote: > > E.g. > > Query : text_field:term=f=100 > > Result : > > 1225 > > 1082 > > 1076 > > > > Query : text_field:term=f=200

Re: Results of facet differs with change in facet.limit.

wrote: > Hmm, I'd be interested what you get if you restrict your > queries to individual shards using =false. This > will go to the individual shard you address and no others. > > Does the facet count change in those circumstances? > > Best, > Erick > > On Tue, Ma

Re: Results of facet differs with change in facet.limit.

I tried to reproduce the same issue with a field of following type but could not. Please share your inputs. Best, Modassar On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Kindly share your inputs on this issue. > > Thanks, > Mo

Re: Results of facet differs with change in facet.limit.

Hi, Kindly share your inputs on this issue. Thanks, Modassar On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a field f which is defined as follows on solr 5.x. It is 12 shard > cluster with no replica. > > store

Results of facet differs with change in facet.limit.

Hi, I have a field f which is defined as follows on solr 5.x. It is 12 shard cluster with no replica. When I facet on this field with different facet.limit I get different facet count. E.g. Query : text_field:term=f=100 Result : 1225 1082 1076 Query : text_field:term=f=200 1366 1321 1315 I

Re: Wildcard query behavior.

t stem > the same way at all, so searching for "validato*" wouldn't produce the > expected response. > > Best, > Erick > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > > On 4/18/2016 1:18 AM, Modassar Ather wrote: >

Re: Wildcard query behavior.

here as > field with stemmer which stems "validator" to "validate" (if this stemming > was applied at index time as well as query time) its looking for records > that have "validate" or "validator", so for obvious reasons, numFound might > have bee

Wildcard query behavior.

Hi, Please help me understand following. I have analysis chain which uses KStemFilterFactory for a field. Solr version is 5.4.0 When I search for f:validator I get 80K+ documents whereas if I search for f:validator* I get only around 150 results. When I checked on analysis page I see that

Re: Query behavior.

ed boolean query? > > -- Jack Krupansky > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > What I understand by q.op is the default operator. If there is no AND/OR > > in-between the terms the default will be AND as per my s

Re: Query behavior.

that q.op=AND was going > to perform some function in a query with only two terms and and OR > operator? I mean, why not just drop the q.op=AND? > > -- Jack Krupansky > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Jack as

Re: Query behavior.

rupansky > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:46 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Thanks Jack for your response. > > The following jira bug for this issue is already present so I have not > > created a new one. > > https://issu

Re: Understanding parsed queries.

he fl > term is that it's present only in docs with term2 and term3 in them > perhaps? > > Best, > Erick > > Best, > Erick > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:22 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Kindly help me un

Understanding parsed queries.

Hi, Kindly help me understand the parsed queries of following three queries. How these parsed queries can be interpreted for boolean logic. Please ignore the boost part. *Query : *fl:term1 OR fl:term2 AND fl:term3 *"parsedquery_toString" : *"boost(+(fl:term1 +fl:term2 +fl:term3),int(doc_wt))",

Re: Query behavior.

rms are required (Lucene MinShouldMatch.) > > > -- Jack Krupansky > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 3:41 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Thanks Shawn for pointing to the jira issue. I was not sure that if it is > > an expected behavior or a

Re: Query behavior.

Thanks Shawn for pointing to the jira issue. I was not sure that if it is an expected behavior or a bug or there could have been a way to get the desired result. Best, Modassar On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > On 3/9/2016 10:55 PM, Shawn Heisey

Re: Query behavior.

Hi, A suggestion will be very helpful. Thanks, Modassar On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Kindly help me understand the parsing of following query. I am using > edismax parser and Solr-5.5.0. > q.op is set to AND and

Query behavior.

Hi, Kindly help me understand the parsing of following query. I am using edismax parser and Solr-5.5.0. q.op is set to AND and there is no explicit mm value set. fl:(java OR book) => "boost(+((fl:java fl:book)~2),int(val))" When the query has explicit OR then why the ~2 is present in the parsed

Re: SOLR ranking

; If I remember well I debugged that recently. > > Cheers > > On 16 February 2016 at 11:42, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Actually you can get it with the edismax. > > Just set mm to 100% and then configure a pf field ( or more) . &

Re: SOLR ranking

Actually you can get it with the edismax. Just set mm to 100% and then configure a pf field ( or more) . You are going to search all the search terms mandatory and boost phrases match . @Alessandro Thanks for your insight. I thought that the document will be boosted if all of the terms appear in

Re: SOLR ranking

First it will search for "Eating Disorders" together and then the individual words "Eating" and "Disorders" I don't think the phrase will be searched as individual ANDed terms until the query has it like below. "Eating Disorders" OR (Eating AND Disorders). Best, Modassar On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at

Re: Searching special characters

You can search them by escaping with backslash. Best, Modassar

Re: Searching special characters

.@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for quick response. > > Should these be treated differently during index ? > > I have tried *\"Audit* which is returning results of *Audit *also which is > incorrect. what do you say ? > > On 12 February 2016 at 15:07, Modassar Ather <modat

Re: Multi-lingual search

And what does proximity search exactly mean? A proximity search means searching terms with a distance in between them. E.g. Search for a document which has java near 3 words of network. field:"java network"~3 So the above query will match any document having a distance of 3 by its position

Re: CorruptIndexException during optimize.

Hi, Kindly provide your inputs on the issue. Thanks, Modassar On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Got following error during optimize of index on 2 nodes of 12 node > cluster. Please let me know if the index can be

CorruptIndexException during optimize.

Hi, Got following error during optimize of index on 2 nodes of 12 node cluster. Please let me know if the index can be recovered and how and what could be the reason? Total number of nodes: 12 No replica. Solr version - 5.4.0 Java version - 1.7.0_91 (Open JDK 64 bit) Ubuntu version : Ubuntu

Re: Position increment in WordDelimiterFilter.

, Emir Arnautovic < emir.arnauto...@sematext.com> wrote: > Can you please send us tokens you get (and positions) when you analyze > *WiFi device* > > On 15.01.2016 13:15, Modassar Ather wrote: > >> Are you saying that WiFi Wi-Fi and Wi Fi should not match each other? >&g

Re: Position increment in WordDelimiterFilter.

ining WiFi device will be seen as a phrase with no word in between hence it should match phrase "WiFi device" but it will not whereas "WiFi device"~1 will matched. Best, Modassar On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 1/18/2016

Re: Position increment in WordDelimiterFilter.

es where it is > useful? > > Thanks, > Emir > > > On 15.01.2016 05:13, Modassar Ather wrote: > >> Thanks for your responses. >> >> It seems to me that you don't want to split on numbers. >> It is not with number only. Even if you try to analyze WiFi i

Position increment in WordDelimiterFilter.

Hi, I have following definition for WordDelimiterFilter. The analysis of 3d shows following four tokens and their positions. token position 3d 1 3 1 3d 1 d 2 Please help me understand why d is at 2? Should not it also be at position

Re: Position increment in WordDelimiterFilter.

sar, > > Why do you think it should be at position 1? In that case searching for > > "3 d" would not find anything. Is it what you expect? > > > > Thanks, > > Emir > > > > On 14.01.2016 10:15, Modassar Ather wrote: > > > Hi, > > > &

Re: Position increment in WordDelimiterFilter.

keeping all terms for WDF at the same > position. There was also some discussion about whether this was either a > bug or a bug fix, but I don't recall any resolution. > > -- Jack Krupansky > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:15 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wr

Re: Performance of stats=true={!cardinality=1.0}fl

Hi, An input will be helpful. Thanks, Modassar On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > *q=fl1:net*=fl=50=true={!cardinality=1.0}fl* > is returning cardinality around 15 million. It is taking around 4 minutes. > Simil

Re: Performance of stats=true={!cardinality=1.0}fl

016-01-06 at 12:39 +0530, Modassar Ather wrote: > > > *q=fl1:net*=fl=50=true={!cardinality=1.0}fl* > > is returning cardinality around 15 million. It is taking around 4 > minutes. > > Is this a single shard or multiple? > > Anyway, you might have better luck trying

Re: Query behavior difference.

. Thanks, Modassar On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your response Ahmet. > > Best, > Modassar > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Ahmet Arslan <iori...@yahoo.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> Hi, >&g

Re: Query behavior difference.

t; https://lucene.apache.org/core/5_4_0/core/org/apache/lucene/search/MultiTermQuery.html#CONSTANT_SCORE_REWRITE > > https://lucene.apache.org/core/5_4_0/core/org/apache/lucene/search/WildcardQuery.html > > > -- Jack Krupansky > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Modassar Ather <mo

Re: Query behavior difference.

ts that are retrieved. > > Ahmet > > > > On Monday, January 4, 2016 12:22 PM, Modassar Ather < > modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Kindly help me understand how will relevance ranking differ int following > searches. > > query : fl:network >

Performance of stats=true={!cardinality=1.0}fl

Hi, *q=fl1:net*=fl=50=true={!cardinality=1.0}fl* is returning cardinality around 15 million. It is taking around 4 minutes. Similar response time is seen with different queries which yields high cardinality. Kindly note that the cardinality=1.0 is the desired goal. Here in the above example the

Query behavior difference.

Hi, Kindly help me understand how will relevance ranking differ int following searches. query : fl:network query : fl:networ* What I am observing that the results returned are different in both of them in a way that the top documents returned for q=fl:network is not present in the top results

Re: Best practices on monitoring Solr

Last week our Solr Search was un-responsive and we need to re-boot the server, but we were able to find out after customer complained about it. What's best way to monitor that search is working? May not be the best way but you can write a class which keeps on checking the status of all the nodes

Re: Slow query response.

t; repeatedly page in portions of the index and probably additional CPU usage > as well. > > How many rows are you returning on each query? Are you using all these > terms just to filter a smaller query or to return a large bulk of > documents? > > > -- Jack Krupansky > >

Slow query response.

Hi, I have a field f which is defined as follows. Solr-5.2.1 is used. The index is spread across 12 shards (no replica) and the index size on each node is around 100 GB. When I search for 50 thousand values (ORed) in the field f it takes almost around 45 to 55 seconds. Per my understanding it

Re: Difference in query behavior.

:14 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your response. > > Upayavira : The missing bracket is a copy paste error. Correct parsed > query : +(+topic:facet +(title:solr title:lucene title:api)). Use of fq is > not an option as these are user

Difference in query behavior.

Hi, I have a query title:(solr lucene api). The mm is set to 100% using q.op as AND. When the query is executed it returns documnets having all the terms. It parses to following: +(title:solr title:faceting title:api)~3 Similarlly I have another query like this topic:facet AND title:(solr lucene

Re: Exception in grouping with docValues enable field.

Hi, Any input will be really helpful. Regards, Modassar On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have following docValues enabled field. > > *Field : * > *Type: * sortMissingLast="true" stored="

Re: Solr Cloud and Multiple Indexes

ter in some > sense, such as performance? > > Which version of solr are you using? > Currently, I am using Solr 5.3. btw, I could not find segment info link. Is > it under Core Admin? > > Regards, > Salman > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Modassar Ather <modat

Re: Exception in grouping with docValues enable field.

similar. You also did not mention the version of Solr. > > Regards, >Alex. > > Solr Analyzers, Tokenizers, Filters, URPs and even a newsletter: > http://www.solr-start.com/ > > > On 8 November 2015 at 22:59, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > w

Re: Solr Cloud and Multiple Indexes

What is your index size? How much memory is used? What type of queries are slow? Are there GC pauses as they can be a cause of slowness? Are document updates/additions happening in parallel? The queries are very slow to run so I was thinking to distribute the indexes into multiple indexes and

Re: Solr Cloud and Multiple Indexes

> article https://wiki.apache.org/solr/DistributedSearch. What I was looking > for how this is handled in Solr Cloud? > > > Regards, > Salman > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > What

Exception in grouping with docValues enable field.

Hi, I have following docValues enabled field. *Field : * *Type: * When I am grouping on this field I am getting following exception. Kindly let me know if I am missing something or it is an issue. org.apache.solr.common.SolrException; java.lang.NullPointerException at

Re: Solr Cloud and Multiple Indexes

onsumption is 1.58 GB > > How many segments are there in the index? The more the segment the slower > is > the search. > How do I check how many segments are there in the index? > > Is this after you moved to solrcloud? > I have been using SolrCloud from the beginning. > &g

Re: warning

wrote: > Thanks Modassar for replying , > > could u please elaborate ..what wuld have happened when we were getting > this kind of warning ds > > Regards, > Abhishek Tiwari > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > &g

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

> wunder > Walter Underwood > wun...@wunderwood.org > http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > > > > On Nov 2, 2015, at 5:17 AM, Toke Eskildsen <t...@statsbiblioteket.dk> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 17:27 +0530, Modassar Ather wrote: > > >

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

a good for other system activities. Thanks, Modassar On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Toke Eskildsen <t...@statsbiblioteket.dk> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 12:00 +0530, Modassar Ather wrote: > > I have a setup of 12 shard cluster started with 28gb memory each on a &g

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

Just to add one more point that one external Zookeeper instance is also running on this particular machine. Regards, Modassar On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Toke, > Thanks for your response. My comments in-line. > > T

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

iblioteket.dk> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 16:25 +0530, Modassar Ather wrote: > > The remaining size after you removed the heap usage should be reserved > for > > the index (not only the other system activities). > > I am not able to get the above point. So whe

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

t; This seems impossible if you are sure that only one query is played at a > > time and no indexing is performed. Best thing to do is to dump stack > trace > > of the solr nodes during the query and to check what the threads are > doing. > > > > Jim > > > >

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

gb RAM and 140 gb of index on each node. Regards, Modassar On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay. I guess your observation of 400% for a single core is with top and > looking at that core's entry? If so, the 400% can be explained by

Re: warning

Normally tlog is replayed in case if solr server crashes for some reason and when restarted it tries to recover from the crash gracefully. You can look into following documentation which explains about transaction logs and related stuff of Solr.

Re: Very high memory and CPU utilization.

gt; > index. If not then you rely on the speed of your disk, if you have SSDs > > it's better but reads are still significantly slower with SSDs than with > > direct RAM access. Another thing to keep in mind is that mmap will always > > tries to put things in RAM, this is why I sus

Very high memory and CPU utilization.

Hi, I have a setup of 12 shard cluster started with 28gb memory each on a single server. There are no replica. The size of index is around 90gb on each shard. The Solr version is 5.2.1. When I query "network se*", the memory utilization goes upto 24-26 gb and the query takes around 3+ minutes to

Re: [Help]Solr_Not_Responding

The information given is not sufficient to conclude a cause. You can check the solr logs for details for any exception. Regards, Modassar On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Franky Parulian Silalahi < fra...@telunjuk.com> wrote: > I have problem with my solr and i run in centos 7. > sometime my

Re: Search results differs with sorting on pagination.

at 12:52 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > Add fl=id,score,[shard] to your query, and show us the results of two > differing executions. > > Perhaps we will be able to see the cause of the difference. > > Upayavira > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015, at 05:35 AM, Mo

Re: Search results differs with sorting on pagination.

from all shard and then based on their score it should be sorted. But here I see that every time I hit the sort query I am getting results from different shard which has different scores. Thanks, Modassar On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: Search results differs with sorting on pagination.

different > shards with the same score, the order would not be predictable - > probably down to which shard responds first. > > Fix it with something like sort=score,timestamp or some other time > related field. > > Upayavira > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Modassar At

Re: Search results differs with sorting on pagination.

es > due to a zillion possible causes, network latency, a minor GC pause on one > of the shards, whether all the caches are loaded, whatever. So subsequent > calls will happen to get some _other_ shards docs in the list first. > > Does that make sense? > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at

Search results differs with sorting on pagination.

Hi, Search results are changed every time the following query is hit. Please note that it is 7 shard cluster of Solr-5.2.1. Query: q=network=50=50=f_sort asc=true=id Following are the fields and their types in my schema.xml. As per my understanding it seems to be the issue of tie among

Re: Search results differs with sorting on pagination.

or two docs. > > Best, > Erick > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Modassar Ather <modather1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Search results are changed every time the following query is hit. Please > > note that it is 7 shard cluster of Solr-5.2.1

  1   2   >