On the one hand, I found really interesting those comments about the reasons
for sharding. Documentation agrees you about why to split an index in
several shards (big sizes problems) but I don't find any explanation about
the inconvenients as an Access Control List. I guess there should be some
and they can be critical in this design. Any example?
On the other hand, the performance problems. I have configured big caches
and I launch a test of simultaneous requests (with the same query) without
commiting during the test. The caches are initially empty and after the
test:
name queryResultCache
stats
lookups 1129
hits 1120
hitratio 0.99
inserts 16
evictions 0
size 9
warmupTime 0
cumulative_lookups 1129
cumulative_hits 1120
cumulative_hitratio 0.99
cumulative_inserts 16
cumulative_evictions 0
name documentCache
stats
lookups 6750
hits 6440
hitratio 0.95
inserts 310
evictions 0
size 310
warmupTime 0
cumulative_lookups 6750
cumulative_hits 6440
cumulative_hitratio 0.95
cumulative_inserts 310
cumulative_evictions 0
Although most of the queries are cache hits, the performance is still
dependent of the number of simultaneous queries:
1 simultaneous query: 3437 ms (cache fails)
2 simultaneous queries: 594, 954 ms
10 simultaneous queries: 1047, 1313, 1438, 1797, 1922, 2094, 2250, 2500,
2938, 3000 ms
50 simultaneous queries: 1203, 1453, 1453, 1437, 1625, 1953, 5688, 12938,
14953, 16281, 15984, 16453, 15812, 16469, 16563, 16844, 17703, 16843, 17359,
16828, 18235, 18219, 18172, 18203, 17672, 17344, 17453, 18484, 18157, 18531,
18297, 18359, 18063, 18516, 18125, 17516, 18562, 18016, 18187, 18610, 18703,
18672, 17829, 18344, 18797, 18781, 18265, 18875, 18250, 18812
100 simultaneous queries: 1297, 1531, 1969, 2203, 2375, 2891, 3937, 4109,
4703, 4890, 5047, 5312, 5563, 6422, 6437, 7063, 7093, 7391, 7594, 7672,
8172, 8547, 8750, 8984, 9265, 9609, 9907, 10344, 11406, 11484, 11484, 11500,
11547, 11703, 11797, 11875, 11922, 12328, 12375, 12875, 12922, 13187, 13219,
13407, 13500, 13562, 13719, 13828, 13875, 14016, 14078, 14672, 15922, 16328,
16625, 16953, 17282, 18172, 18484, 18985, 20594, 20625, 20860, 21281, 21469,
21625, 21875, 21875, 22141, 22157, 22172, 23125, 23125, 23141, 23203, 23203,
23328, 24625, 24641, 24672, 24797, 24985, 25031, 25188, 25844, 25937, 26016,
26437, 26453, 26437, 26485, 28297, 28687, 31782, 31985, 31969, 32016, 32031,
32016, 32281 ms
Is this an expected situation? Is there any technique for not being so
dependent of the number simultaneuos queries? (due to economical reasons,
replication in more servers is not an option)
Thanks in advance (and also thanks for previous comments)
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Improving-Solr-performance-tp2210843p2249108.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
