Hopefully I will be able to post results shortly on 2P4C performance.
~ Sourajit
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Toke Eskildsen wrote:
> Sourajit Basak [sourajit.ba...@gmail.com]:
> > Does more processors with less cores or less processors with more cores
> > i.e. which of 4P2C or 2P4C has bes
Sourajit Basak [sourajit.ba...@gmail.com]:
> Does more processors with less cores or less processors with more cores
> i.e. which of 4P2C or 2P4C has best cost per query ?
I have not tested that, so everything I say is (somewhat qualified) guesswork.
Assuming a NUMA architecture, my guess is that
@Erick,
Your revelation on SSDs is very valuable.
Do you have any idea on the following ?
Does more processors with less cores or less processors with more cores
i.e. which of 4P2C or 2P4C has best cost per query ?
~ Sourajit
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Thanks for t
Thanks for this, hard data is always welcome!
Another blog post for my reference list!
Erick
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Toke Eskildsen wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 07:15 +0200, Andy wrote:
>> One question I have is did you precondition the SSD (
>> http://www.sandforce.com/userfiles/fil
On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 07:15 +0200, Andy wrote:
> One question I have is did you precondition the SSD (
> http://www.sandforce.com/userfiles/file/downloads/FMS2009_F2A_Smith.pdf )?
> SSD performance tends to take a very deep dive once all blocks are written at
> least once and the garbage collect
collector kicks in.
From: Toke Eskildsen
To: "solr-user@lucene.apache.org"
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 7:11 PM
Subject: [blogpost] Memory is overrated, use SSDs
Inspired by multiple Solr mailing list entries during the last month or two, I
did s
Shawn Heisey [s...@elyograg.org]:
> This is awesome! Concrete info is better than speculation.
Thank you.
> I think it might be time to split the SSD section of
> SolrPerformanceProblems into its own wiki page and expand it.
That might be a good idea. It would also be interesting to try and meas
> Inspired by multiple Solr mailing list entries during the last month or
> two, I did some search performance testing on our 11M documents / 49GB
> index using logged queries on Solr 4 with MMapDirectory. It turns out that
> our setup with Solid State Drives and 8GB of RAM (which leaves 5GB for
>
Inspired by multiple Solr mailing list entries during the last month or two, I
did some search performance testing on our 11M documents / 49GB index using
logged queries on Solr 4 with MMapDirectory. It turns out that our setup with
Solid State Drives and 8GB of RAM (which leaves 5GB for disk ca
