sure, SSD or RAM disks fix these problems with IO.
Anyhow, I can really see no alternative for some in memory index for
slaves, especially for low latency master-slave apps (high commit rate
is a problem).
having possibility to run slaves in memory that are slurping updates
from Master seams t
sure, SSD or RAM disks fix these problems with IO.
Anyhow, I can really see no alternative for some in memory index for
slaves, especially for low latency master-slave apps (high commit rate
is a problem).
having possibility to run slaves in memory that are slurping updates
from Master seams t
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 09:35 +0200, eks dev wrote:
> In MMAP, you need to have really smart warm up (MMAP) to beat IO
> quirks, for RAMDir you need to tune gc(), choose your poison :)
Other alternatives are operating system RAM disks (avoids the GC
problem) and using SSDs (nearly the same performa
config.xml in the slave to
>> and replicated:
>> > class="solr.StandardDirectoryFactory"/>
>> I was able to see the results.
>>
>> Shouldn’t RAMDirectoryFactory be used for reading index from disk into
>> memory?
>>
>>
sults.
>
> Shouldn’t RAMDirectoryFactory be used for reading index from disk into
> memory?
>
> Any help/pointers in the right direction would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Using-RAMDirectoryFactory-in-Master-Slave-setup-tp3111792p3111792.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
bit more formally and post to the list.
Thanks for the help again!
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Using-RAMDirectoryFactory-in-Master-Slave-setup-tp3112007p3114809.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Your best bet is MMapDirectoryFactory, you can come very close to the
performance of the RAMDirectory. Unfortunatelly this setup with
Master_on_disk->Slaves_in_ram type of setup is not possible using
solr.
We are moving our architecture to solr at the moment, and this is one
of "missings" we have
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM, nipunb wrote:
> I found a similar post -
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Problems-with-RAMDirectory-in-Solr-td1575223.html
> It mentions that Java based replication might work (This is what I have
> used, but didn't work for me)
Solr Replication does not wor
to
do this job better.
Has anybody had a chance to do a comparison based on query performance for
StandardDirectoryFactory vs RAMDirectoryFactory.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Using-RAMDirectoryFactory-in-Master-Slave-setup-tp3112007p3112818.html
Sent fro
Overview Trying to evaluate if keeping the index in memory using
RAMDirectoryFactory can help in query performance.I am trying to perform the
indexing on the master using solr.StandardDirectoryFactory and on the slave
using solr.RAMDirectoryFactory
Details:
We have set-up Solr in a master/slave
the results.
Shouldn’t RAMDirectoryFactory be used for reading index from disk into
memory?
Any help/pointers in the right direction would be appreciated.
Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Using-RAMDirectoryFactory-in-Master-Slave-setup
11 matches
Mail list logo
