Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Erick Erickson
ssage- > From: qungg [mailto:qzheng1...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:55 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: Slow performance on distributed search > > for start=100,000&row=10. event though each individual shard take only < 10ms > to qu

RE: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Michael Ryan
olr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Slow performance on distributed search for start=100,000&row=10. event though each individual shard take only < 10ms to query, the merging process done by controller would take about a minutes. By looking at logs, each shard is giving the controller shard

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Michael Della Bitta
From: Walter Underwood >> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:47 PM >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Slow performance on distributed search >> >> Why on earth are you starting at row 100,000? What use case is hat? --wunder >> >> On

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Walter Underwood
, 2013, at 1:14 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: > (You mean, other than "deep paging".) > > -- Jack Krupansky > > -Original Message- From: Walter Underwood > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:47 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Slow performance

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Jack Krupansky
(You mean, other than "deep paging".) -- Jack Krupansky -Original Message- From: Walter Underwood Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:47 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Slow performance on distributed search Why on earth are you starting at row 100,000? What u

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Walter Underwood
Why on earth are you starting at row 100,000? What use case is that? --wunder On Mar 26, 2013, at 11:55 AM, qungg wrote: > for start=100,000&row=10. event though each individual shard take only < 10ms > to query, the merging process done by controller would take about a minutes. > > By looking

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Joel Bernstein
ng time. > > I have not tried solr cloud, does any one know the performance of query > large start row on solr cloud? > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Slow-performance-on-distributed-search-tp4051434p4051492.html &

RE: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread qungg
troller is getting 100,010*40 rows of data, therefore merging is taking a long time. I have not tried solr cloud, does any one know the performance of query large start row on solr cloud? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Slow-performance-on-distributed

RE: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Michael Ryan
-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Slow performance on distributed search Hi, I have 40 shards running on 48 core machine with 256GB RAM (The data is about 40 GB). I am using legacy distributed method as setup. So I have one additional shard with no data. Queries would go to this shard and the shard

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread qungg
.nabble.com/Slow-performance-on-distributed-search-tp4051434p4051439.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread Otis Gospodnetic
ontains no documents. > > I can tell that merging result is the bottle neck here, but I couldn't find > a way to fix it. Please let me know if you guys have any suggestion. Thanks > in advance! > > Best Regards, > Qun > > > > -- > View this message in con

Slow performance on distributed search

2013-03-26 Thread qungg
tell that merging result is the bottle neck here, but I couldn't find a way to fix it. Please let me know if you guys have any suggestion. Thanks in advance! Best Regards, Qun -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Slow-performance-on-distributed-search-tp40