On 11/21/2012 12:36 AM, stockii wrote:
okay. i will try out more RAM.
i am using not much caching because of near-realt-time-search. in this
case its better to increase xmn or only xmx and xms?
I have personally found that increasing the size of the young generation
(Eden) is beneficial to
I have personally found that increasing the size of the young generation
(Eden) is beneficial to Solr,
I've seen the same thing - I think it's because requests create a lot
of short lived objects and if the eden is not large enough, a lot of
those objects will make it to the tenured space,
the memory and going OOM?
starting with: MEMORY_OPTIONS=-Xmx6g -Xms2G -Xmn1G
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Out-Of-Memory-Too-many-cores-on-one-server-tp4020675.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I guess you should give JVM more memory.
When starting to find a good value for -Xmx I oversized and set
it to Xmx20G and Xms20G. Then I monitored the system and saw that JVM is
between 5G and 10G (java7 with G1 GC).
Now it is finally set to Xmx11G and Xms11G for my system with 1 core and 38
Hi,
your JVM need more RAM. My setup works well with 10 Cores, and 300mio.
docs, Xmx8GB Xms8GB, 16GB for OS.
But it's how Bernd mentioned, the memory consumption depends on the
number of fields and the fieldCache.
Best Regards
Vadim
2012/11/16 Bernd Fehling bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de:
I
