k
> into it as a reference.
>
> Regards,
> Rahul.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solrj-performance-bottleneck-tp2682797p2779387.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
ected results.
Thanks Victor, I appreciate the link to the Jquery example and we will look
into it as a reference.
Regards,
Rahul.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solrj-performance-bottleneck-tp2682797p2779387.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archi
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
on
without affecting search performance much, please do share them.
Once again, thanks for your inputs in analyzing our issues.
Thanks,
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solrj-performance-bottleneck-tp2682797p2775245.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list
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
ed 'client not reading fast
enough'. Whether it is related to network or Solrj.
Thanks in advance for your info.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solrj-performance-bottleneck-tp2682797p2687448.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
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.
>
>
size as around 1024 mb.
Thanks,
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solrj-performance-bottleneck-tp2681294p2681294.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 matches
Mail list logo
