It looks like my filterCache was too big. I reduced my filterCache size from
700,000 to 20,000 (without changing the heap size) and all my performance
issues went away. I experimented with various GC settings, but none of them
made a significant difference.
I see a 16% increase in throughput by a
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:28 PM, wojtekpia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm seeing some strange behavior with my garbage collector that disappears
> when I turn off this optimization.
I just changed the new faceting code to use a solr cache.
Look for the "fieldValueCache" on the statistics page now
Peter,
It is UnInvertedField class. See also:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-475
Peter Keegan wrote:
Hi Yonik,
May I ask in which class(es) this improvement was made? I've been using the
DocSet, DocList, BitDocSet, HashDocSet from Solr from a few years ago with a
Lucene based app.
very similar situation to those already reported. 2.9M bilbiographic
records, with authors being the (previous) bottleneck, and the one
we're starting to test with the new algorithm.
so far, no load tests, but just in single requests i'm seeing the same
improvements...phenomenal improvements, btw
Hi Yonik,
May I ask in which class(es) this improvement was made? I've been using the
DocSet, DocList, BitDocSet, HashDocSet from Solr from a few years ago with a
Lucene based app. to do faceting.
Thanks,
Peter
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A new f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Till Kinstler schrieb:
Hi,
> I just did a quick test using Solr nightly 2008-11-30. I have an index
> of about 2.9 mil bibliographic records, size: 16G. I tested facetting
> author names, each index document may contain multiple author names, so
> au
Yonik Seeley schrieb:
We'd love some feedback on how it works to
ensure that it actually is a win for the majority and should be the
default.
I just did a quick test using Solr nightly 2008-11-30. I have an index
of about 2.9 mil bibliographic records, size: 16G. I tested facetting
author na
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:57 PM, wojtekpia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>
>> Are you doing commits at any time?
>> One possibility is the caching mechanism (weak-ref on the
>> IndexReader)... that's going to be changing soon hopefully.
>>
>> -Yonik
>>
>
> No commits during this
Yonik Seeley wrote:
>
>
> Are you doing commits at any time?
> One possibility is the caching mechanism (weak-ref on the
> IndexReader)... that's going to be changing soon hopefully.
>
> -Yonik
>
No commits during this test. Should I start looking into my heap size
distribution and garbage
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:28 PM, wojtekpia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm seeing some strange behavior with my garbage collector that disappears
> when I turn off this optimization. I'm running load tests on my deployment.
> For the first few minutes, everything is fine (and this patch does make
>
I'm seeing some strange behavior with my garbage collector that disappears
when I turn off this optimization. I'm running load tests on my deployment.
For the first few minutes, everything is fine (and this patch does make
things faster - I haven't quantified the improvement yet). After that, the
Definitely, but it'll take me a few days. I'll also report findings on
SOLR-465. (I've been on holiday for a few weeks)
Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् wrote:
>
> wojtek, you can report back the numbers if possible
>
> It would be nice to know how the new impl performs in real-world
>
>
>
--
Vi
wojtek, you can report back the numbers if possible
It would be nice to know how the new impl performs in real-world
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:45 PM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:10 PM, wojtekpia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is there a configurable way to sw
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:10 PM, wojtekpia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a configurable way to switch to the previous implementation? I'd
> like to see exactly how it affects performance in my case.
Thanks for the reminder, I need to document this in the wiki.
facet.method=enum (enumerate
Is there a configurable way to switch to the previous implementation? I'd
like to see exactly how it affects performance in my case.
Yonik Seeley wrote:
>
> And if you want to verify that the new faceting code has indeed kicked
> in, some statistics are logged, like:
>
> Nov 24, 2008 11:14:32
And if you want to verify that the new faceting code has indeed kicked
in, some statistics are logged, like:
Nov 24, 2008 11:14:32 PM org.apache.solr.request.UnInvertedField uninvert
INFO: UnInverted multi-valued field features, memSize=14584, time=47, phase1=47,
nTerms=285, bigTerms=99, termInst
16 matches
Mail list logo
