o see some disk activity but the disk is never pegged and performance is
great.
Thank you everyone for steering me in the right direction.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100p4037262.html
Sent from the Solr - User maili
is all in memory, other than that
> all my queries return quickly?
>
> Thanks very much. for your help.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100p4027232.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 1:11 PM, S L wrote:
> My virtual machine has 6GB of RAM. Tomcat is currently configured to use 4GB
> of it. The size of the index is 5.4GB for 3 million records which averages
> out to 1.8KB per record. I can look at trimming the data, having fewer
> records in the index to
message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100p4027233.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
way to tell if the index is all in memory, other than that
all my queries return quickly?
Thanks very much. for your help.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100p4027232.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:04 PM, S L wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the responses.
>
> I did some more queries and watched disk activity with iostat. Sure enough,
> during some of the slow queries the disk was pegged at 100% (or more.)
>
> The requirement for the app I'm building is to be able to r
message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100p4027225.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
provide on how to optimize
this.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100p4027224.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:43 PM, S L wrote:
> Does anyone have an idea why a query that takes solr just half a second (500
> ms) to execute would take 3 seconds to transfer the data?
Normally this is due to slow reading of the stored fields (i.e. slow disk IO).
For scalability, we don't read all
: 500
:
: I'm guessing the delay is from Lucene and not the network but I could be
: wrong. 90% of my queries are 8 to 10 times faster than this.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrTerminology
QTime: The elapsed time (in milliseconds) between the arrival of the
request (when the ?SolrQueryRequest
on't think the
> network is a problem. Most queries return in a small fraction of a second
> of
> real time.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-tp4027100.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
, this is a
query submitted from the same machine the index is on so I don't think the
network is a problem. Most queries return in a small fraction of a second of
real time.
Thanks.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/small-QTime-but-slow-results-to-user-t
12 matches
Mail list logo
