Re: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-07-02 Thread Chris Hostetter
: Subject: OOM on uninvert field request : In-Reply-To: <1277850992.1955.6.ca...@kratos> : References: <1277726685.6747.2.ca...@kratos> : <9f5fcd40-c9bb-4cfb-bb0d-d3cdf1680...@gmail.com> : <9eb24a79bbfe195513fa05e0ce2c654c.squir...@sm.webmail.pair.com> : : : <1277850992.1955.

Re: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-30 Thread Yonik Seeley
method=fc -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com > -Original Message- > From: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 1:38 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: OOM on uninvert field request > >

RE: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-30 Thread Robert Petersen
...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 1:38 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: OOM on uninvert field request On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Robert Petersen wrote: > Hello I am trying to find the right max and min settings for Java 1.6 on 20GB > index

Re: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-30 Thread Lance Norskog
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Robert Petersen wrote: >> Hello I am trying to find the right max and min settings for Java 1.6 on >> 20GB index with 8 million docs, running 1.6_018 JVM with solr 1.4, and am >> currently have java set to a

Re: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-30 Thread Yonik Seeley
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Robert Petersen wrote: > Hello I am trying to find the right max and min settings for Java 1.6 on 20GB > index with 8 million docs, running 1.6_018 JVM with solr 1.4, and am > currently have java set to an even 4GB (export JAVA_OPTS="-Xmx4096m > -Xms4096m") for

RE: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-30 Thread Robert Petersen
.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 8:42 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: OOM on uninvert field request Yes, it is better to use ints for ids than strings. Also, the Trie int fields have a compressed format that may cut the storage needs even more. 8m * 4 = 32mb, times "a few

RE: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-30 Thread Robert Petersen
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: OOM on uninvert field request Yes, it is better to use ints for ids than strings. Also, the Trie int fields have a compressed format that may cut the storage needs even more. 8m * 4 = 32mb, times "a few hundred", we'll say 300, is 900mb o

Re: OOM on uninvert field request

2010-06-29 Thread Lance Norskog
Yes, it is better to use ints for ids than strings. Also, the Trie int fields have a compressed format that may cut the storage needs even more. 8m * 4 = 32mb, times "a few hundred", we'll say 300, is 900mb of IDs. I don't know how these fields are stored, but if they are separate objects we've bl