Actually , It's pretty high end for most of the users. Rishi, u can post the real h/w details and our typical deployment . No :of cpus per node No :of disks per host Vms per host Gc params No :of cores per instance
Noble Paul Sent from phone On 21 May 2013 01:47, "Rishi Easwaran" <rishi.easwa...@aol.com> wrote: > No, we just upgraded to 4.2.1. > With the size of our complex and effort required apply our patches and > rollout, our upgrades are not that often. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Noureddine Bouhlel <nouredd...@ecotour.com> > To: solr-user <solr-user@lucene.apache.org> > Sent: Mon, May 20, 2013 3:36 pm > Subject: Re: Upgrading from SOLR 3.5 to 4.2.1 Results. > > > Hi Rishi, > > Have you done any tests with Solr 4.3 ? > > Regards, > > > Cordialement, > > BOUHLEL Noureddine > > > > On 17 May 2013 21:29, Rishi Easwaran <rishi.easwa...@aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > Its Friday 3:00pm, warm & sunny outside and it was a good week. Figured > > I'd share some good news. > > I work for AOL mail team and we use SOLR for our mail search backend. > > We have been using it since pre-SOLR 1.4 and strong supporters of SOLR > > community. > > We deal with millions indexes and billions of requests a day across our > > complex. > > We finished full rollout of SOLR 4.2.1 into our production last week. > > > > Some key highlights: > > - ~75% Reduction in Search response times > > - ~50% Reduction in SOLR Disk busy , which in turn helped with ~90% > > Reduction in errors > > - Garbage collection total stop reduction by over 50% moving application > > throughput into the 99.8% - 99.9% range > > - ~15% reduction in CPU usage > > > > We did not tune our application moving from 3.5 to 4.2.1 nor update java. > > For the most part it was a binary upgrade, with patches for our special > > use case. > > > > Now going forward we are looking at prototyping SOLR Cloud for our search > > system, upgrade java and tomcat, tune our application further. Lots of > fun > > stuff :) > > > > Have a great weekend everyone. > > Thanks, > > > > Rishi. > > > > > > > > > > > > >
