Hi,
I did not get any response from this maillist about this quesiton.
Does that mean no one in this mail list used Solr with SAN? Please reply
to me if you use solr with SAN.
Thank you very much.
Yongjun Rong
-Original Message-
From: Yongjun Rong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
Hi,
I'm jus wondering if anybody has experinces about putting the solr
data in SAN instead of local disk. Is there a big performance penalty?
Please share with me your experiences.
Thank you very much.
Yongjun Rong
:[NOW/DAY-7DAYS+TO+NOW/DAY]. It should
return the small set of data and then apply the subcondition
"recordeddate_dt:[NOW/DAY-7DAYS+TO+NOW/DAY]". But from the response
time, it seems not the case.
Can anyone give me some detail explaination about this?
Thank you very much.
Yongjun Ro
eryParser.QueryParser.parse(QueryParser.java:152)
at
org.apache.solr.search.QueryParsing.parseQuery(QueryParsing.java:94)
... 26 more
And I will try to open the cache and see if I can get better query time.
I will let you know.
Thank you very much.
Yongjun Rong
-Original Message-
Fr
DAY.
Yongjun Rong
-Original Message-
From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 1:32 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Search query optimization
Hi,
This is what I was talking about:
recordeddate_dt:[2008-06-16T00:00:00.000Z TO 2008
t need hours, round the values
to days).
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message ----
> From: Yongjun Rong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:56:06 AM
> Subject: RE: Search q
Can anyone give me some explaination why this happens if we have the
query optimization? Thank you very much.
Yongjun Rong
-Original Message-
From: Walter Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 4:57 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Search query
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yonik
Seeley
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 4:12 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Search query optimization
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Yongjun Rong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I have a question about how the lucene query parser. For example, I
&g
memory? Is
there any articles discuss about how to build a optimization query to
save memory and improve performance?
Thank you very much.
Yongjun Rong
That looks good to use those cache. Keep those cache will help improve
your search performance. Try the concurrent GC and see if you get better
result. Please let me know the results.
Best,
Yongjun Rong
-Original Message-
From: gurudev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May
Yongjun Rong-2 wrote:
>
> I had the same problem some weeks before. You can try these:
> 1. Check the hit ratio for the cache via the solr/admin/stats.jsp. If
> the hit ratio is very low. Just disable those cache. It will save you
> some memory.
> 2. set -Xms and -Xmx to the s
I had the same problem some weeks before. You can try these:
1. Check the hit ratio for the cache via the solr/admin/stats.jsp. If
the hit ratio is very low. Just disable those cache. It will save you
some memory.
2. set -Xms and -Xmx to the same size will help improve GC performance.
3. Check wha
Hi,
It seems the latest lucene 2.3 has some improvement on performance.
I'm just wondering if it is ok for us to easily upgrade the solr's
lucene from 2.1 to 2.3. Is any special thing we need to know except just
replace the lucene jars in the lib directory.
Thank you very much.
Yongjun Rong
13 matches
Mail list logo
