It will probably turn out to be a hardware problem - a bad RAM chip. I removed it and today I will test Solr again to make sure everything is fine.
On 3/5/07, Bill Au <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Seems like this maybe a JVM bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6500147 http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=659990&messageID=3876052 Have you tried using a different garbage collector? Bill On 3/3/07, Jed Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yonik Seeley wrote: > > On 3/3/07, Dimitar Ouzounov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> But what hardware problem could it be? Tomorrow I'll make sure that the > >> memory is fine, but nothing > >> else comes to my mind. > > > > Memory, motherboard, etc. > > Try http://www.memtest86.com/ to test this. > > > >> It may be OS-related - probably a buggy version of > >> some library. But which library? > > > > Yep, we've seen that in the past. > > I'd recommend going with OS versions that vendors test with. > > The commercial RHEL or the free clone of it http://www.centos.org/, > > would be my recommendation. > > > > I'm running a lot of CentOS 4.4 myself, on i686 and x86_64 processors. > I'm testing out Solr on an i686 with JDK 1.5 and I'm running a > production copy of Nutch on x86_64 JDK 1.5, Tomcat 1.5. It's been rock > solid. > > From trying to install Java in the past on FC5, I read a lot about how > you had to be rather careful to make absolutely certain that you had no > conflicting gjc libs in your path. If this is a production box, I'd got > with a longer-supported OS than FC6. If the server is only for searching > and apache, I don't think FC6 will give you any noticeable performance > boost over CentOS 4.4. FC6's performance enhancements with > glibc-hash-binding won't affect a JVM. > > > Jed >
