Hi,
Our index is divided into two shards and each of them has 120M docs , total
size 75G in each core.
The server is a pretty good one , jvm is given memory of 70G and about same
is left for OS (SLES 11) .
We use all dynamic fields except th eunique id and are using long queries
but almost all of
cene.apache.org
> Subject: Using Solr 3.4 running on tomcat7 - very slow search
>
> Hi,
>
> Our index is divided into two shards and each of them has 120M docs ,
> total
> size 75G in each core.
> The server is a pretty good one , jvm is given memory of 70G and about
> same
ou better than a monster 70GB JVM.
>
> -- Bryan
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mou [mailto:[hidden
> > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3995446&i=0>]
>
> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:43 PM
> > To: [hidden email]
sides
plausibility to the idea.
-- Bryan
> -Original Message-
> From: Mou [mailto:mouna...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:09 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Using Solr 3.4 running on tomcat7 - very slow search
>
> Thanks Brian. Excellent sugg
ou [mailto:[hidden
> > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3995452&i=0>]
>
> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:09 PM
> > To: [hidden email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3995452&i=1>
> > Subject: Re: Using Solr 3.4 running on
> FWIW, when asked at what point one would want to split JVMs and shard,
> on the same machine, Grant Ingersoll mentioned 16GB, and precisely for
> GC cost reasons. You're way above that.
- his index is 75G, and Grant mentioned RAM heap size; we can use terabytes
of index with 16Gb memory.
bq: This index is only used for searching and being replicated every 7 sec from
the master.
This is a red-flag. 7 second replication times are likely forcing your
app to spend
all its time opening new searchers. Your cached filter queries are
likely rarely being re-used
because they're being throw
x is 75G, and Grant mentioned RAM heap size; we can use
> terabytes
> > of index with 16Gb memory.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
>
>
>> >
>> >> FWIW, when asked at what point one would want to split JVMs and shard,
>> >> on the same machine, Grant Ingersoll mentioned 16GB, and precisely for
>> >> GC cost reasons. You're way above that.
>> >
>> > - his index is 75G, and Grant mentioned RAM heap size; we can use
&g
d be to disable replication for a bit (or lengthen it
> >> to, say, 10 minutes)
> >>
> >> Best
> >> Erick
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Fuad Efendi <[hidden email]<
> http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3995754&i=0>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
10 matches
Mail list logo
