On 7/2/2011 12:34 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
OK, I tried a quick test of 1.4.1 vs 3x on optimized indexes
(unoptimized had different numbers of segments so I didn't try that).
3x (as of today) was 28% faster at a large filter query (300 terms in
one big disjunction, with each term matching ~1000 do
OK, I tried a quick test of 1.4.1 vs 3x on optimized indexes
(unoptimized had different numbers of segments so I didn't try that).
3x (as of today) was 28% faster at a large filter query (300 terms in
one big disjunction, with each term matching ~1000 docs).
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On 6/29/2011 10:16 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
I was thinking perhaps I might actually decrease the termIndexInterval
value below the default of 128. I know from reading the Hathi Trust
blog that memory usage for the tii file is much more than the size of
the file would indicate, but if I increase
On 6/29/2011 7:50 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
OK, your filter queries have hundreds of terms in them (and that means
hundreds of term lookups, which uses the term index).
Thus, your termIndexInterval change is be the leading suspect for the
slowdown. A termIndexInterval of 1024 means that
a term loo
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Yonik Seeley
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> > Just now, three of the six shards had documents deleted, and they took
> > 29.07, 27.57, and 28.66 seconds to warm. The 1.4.1 counterpart to the 29.07
> > second one only took 4.78 s
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> Just now, three of the six shards had documents deleted, and they took
> 29.07, 27.57, and 28.66 seconds to warm. The 1.4.1 counterpart to the 29.07
> second one only took 4.78 seconds, and it did twice as many autowarm
> queries.
Can you po
On 6/29/2011 11:27 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
On 6/29/2011 9:17 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Hmmm, you could comment out the query and filter caches on both 1.4.1
and 3.2
and then run some of the queries to see if you can figure out which
are slower?
Do any of the queries have stopwords in fields whe
On 6/29/2011 9:17 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Hmmm, you could comment out the query and filter caches on both 1.4.1 and 3.2
and then run some of the queries to see if you can figure out which are slower?
Do any of the queries have stopwords in fields where you now index
those? If so, that could ent
Hmmm, you could comment out the query and filter caches on both 1.4.1 and 3.2
and then run some of the queries to see if you can figure out which are slower?
Do any of the queries have stopwords in fields where you now index
those? If so, that could entirely account for the difference.
-Yonik
ht
I have noticed a significant difference in filter cache warming times on
my shards between 3.2 and 1.4.1. What can I do to troubleshoot this?
Please let me know what additional information you might need to look
deeper. I know this isn't enough.
It takes about 3 seconds to do an autowarm co
10 matches
Mail list logo
