There is a separate auto-suggest tool that creates a simple in-memory
database outside of the Lucene index. This is called TST.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:36 AM, rahul wrote:
> Thanks Stefan and Victor ! we are using GWT for front end. We stopped issuing
> multiple asynchronous queries and issue a
Thanks Stefan and Victor ! we are using GWT for front end. We stopped issuing
multiple asynchronous queries and issue a request and fetch results and then
filter the results based on what has
been typed subsequent to the request and then re trigger the request only if
we don't get the expected resu
Dear Rahul,
Stefan has the right solution. the autosuggest must be checked both from
Javascript and your backend. For javascript there are some really nice tools
to do that such as Jquery which implements a auto-suggest with a tunable
delay. It has also highlighting, you can add additional informa
rahul,
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:18 PM, rahul wrote:
> if anybody has some suggestions/experience on how to leverage autosuggestion
> without affecting search performance much, please do share them.
we use javascript intervals for autosuggestion. regularly check the
value of the monitored input f
Hi All,
I just to want to share some findings which clearly identified the reason
for our performance bottleneck. we had looked into several areas for
optimization mostly directed at Solr configurations, stored fields,
highlighting, JVM, OS cache etc. But it turned out that the "main" culprit
was
thanks for all your info.
I will try increase the RAM and check it.
thanks,
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solrj-performance-bottleneck-tp2682797p2692503.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Try give Solr like 1.5gb by setting Jave params. Solr is usually CPU bound. So
medium or large instances are good.
Bill Bell
Sent from mobile
On Mar 16, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Asharudeen wrote:
> Hi
>
> Thanks for your info.
>
> Currently my index size is around 4GB. Normally in small instances
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Asharudeen wrote:
> Currently my index size is around 4GB. Normally in small instances total
> available memory will be 1.6GB. In my setup, I allocated around 1GB as a
> heap size for tomcat. Hence I believe, remaining 600 MB will be used for OS
> cache.
Actually
Hi
Thanks for your info.
Currently my index size is around 4GB. Normally in small instances total
available memory will be 1.6GB. In my setup, I allocated around 1GB as a
heap size for tomcat. Hence I believe, remaining 600 MB will be used for OS
cache.
I believe, I need to migrate my Solr insta
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:25 AM, rahul wrote:
> In our setup, we are having Solr index in one machine. And Solrj client part
> (java code) in another machine. Currently as you suggest, if it may be a
> 'not enough free RAM for the OS to cache' then whether I need to increase
> the RAM in the machi
Hi,
Thanks for your information.
One simple question. Please clarify me.
In our setup, we are having Solr index in one machine. And Solrj client part
(java code) in another machine. Currently as you suggest, if it may be a
'not enough free RAM for the OS to cache' then whether I need to increase
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:12 AM, rahul wrote:
> I am using Solrj as a Solr client in my project.
>
> While searching, for a few words, it seems Solrj takes more time to send
> response, for eg (8 - 12 sec). While searching most of the other words it
> seems Solrj take less amount of time only.
>
>
12 matches
Mail list logo
