Hi Erik,
yes indeed, batching solved it.
I used ConcurrentUpdateSolrClient with queue size of 10000 but
CloudSolrClient doesn't have this feature.
I build my own queue now.
Ah!!! So I obviously use default NRT but actually don't need it because
I don't have any NRT data to index. A latency of several hours is OK for me.
Currently I'm testing with a 3x3 core-cluster (3 server, 3 cores per server).
I also tested with 3x3 node-cluster (3 server, 3 nodes per server) which
performed
better, less influence of GarbageCollection.
I have to read more about PULL or TLOG replicas, how to set this up and so on.
If it is to complex I will go with NRT and indexing is anyway during the night.
Thanks for pointing this out.
Regards,
Bernd
Am 15.05.2018 um 13:28 schrieb Erick Erickson:
What did you do to solve your performance problem?
Batching updates is one thing that helps performance.
bq. I thought that only the leaders are under load
until any commit and then replicate to the other replicas.
True if (and only if) you're using PULL or TLOG replicas.
When using the default NRT replicas, every replica indexes
the docs, it doesn't matter whether they are the leader or replica.
That's required for NRT. Using CloudSolrClient has no bearing
on that functionality.
Best,
Erick
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 6:53 AM, Bernd Fehling
<bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
Thanks, solved, performance is good now.
Regards,
Bernd
Am 15.05.2018 um 08:12 schrieb Bernd Fehling:
OK, I have the CloudSolrClient with SolrJ now running but it seams
a bit slower compared to ConcurrentUpdateSolrClient.
This was not expected.
The logs show that CloudSolrClient send the docs only to the leaders.
So the only advantage of CloudSolrClient is that it is "Cloud aware"?
With ConcurrentUpdateSolrClient I get about 1600 docs/sec for loading.
With CloudSolrClient I get only about 1200 docs/sec.
The system monitoring shows that with CloudSolrClient all nodes and cores
are under heavy load. I thought that only the leaders are under load
until any commit and then replicate to the other replicas.
And that the replicas which are no leader have capacity to answer search
requests.
I think I still don't get the advantage of CloudSolrClient?
Regards,
Bernd
Am 09.05.2018 um 19:15 schrieb Erick Erickson:
You may not need to deal with any of this.
The default CloudSolrClient call creates a new LBHttpSolrClient for
you. So unless you're doing something custom with any LBHttpSolrClient
you create, you don't need to create one yourself.
Second, the default for CloudSolrClient.add() is to take the list of
documents you provide into sub-lists that consist of the docs destined
for a particular shard and sends those to the leader.
Do the default not work for you?
Best,
Erick
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 2:54 AM, Bernd Fehling
<bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
Hi list,
while going from single core master/slave to cloud multi core/node
with leader/replica I want to change my SolrJ loading, because
ConcurrentUpdateSolrClient isn't cloud aware and has performance
impacts.
I want to use CloudSolrClient with LBHttpSolrClient and updates
should only go to shard leaders.
Question, what is the difference between sendUpdatesOnlyToShardLeaders
and sendDirectUpdatesToShardLeadersOnly?
Regards,
Bernd
