On 8/6/2020 6:03 PM, gnandre wrote:
Please ignore the space between. I have updated the calls by removing space
below:
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/select?q=*:*&start=0&rows=10&shards=
my.domain.com/solr/another_core&fl=*
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/select?q=*:*&start=0&rows=10&shards=
loc
Please ignore the space between. I have updated the calls by removing space
below:
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/select?q=*:*&start=0&rows=10&shards=
my.domain.com/solr/another_core&fl=*
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/select?q=*:*&start=0&rows=10&shards=
localhost:8983/solr/another_core&fl=*
O
On 8/6/2020 5:59 PM, gnandre wrote:
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/select?q=*:*&start=0&rows=10&shards=
my.domain.com /solr/another_core&fl=*
Ir does not work in Solr 8.5.2 anymore unless I pass localhost instead of
my domain in shards param value as follows:
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/selec
Hi,
In Solr 6.3 I was able to use following shards query:
http://my.domain.com/solr/core/select?q=*:*&start=0&rows=10&shards=
my.domain.com /solr/another_core&fl=*
Ir does not work in Solr 8.5.2 anymore unless I pass localhost instead of
my domain in shards param value as follows:
http://my.doma
On 10/15/2018 1:30 PM, Dasarathi Minjur wrote:
We have a Hadoop cluster with Solr 6.3 running as service. After an OS
security patching, when the cluster was restarted, Solr Cloud is up
but the shards are down all the time. No specific messages in Solr.log
or console logs. Tried restarting solr
while later and wait again. Usually
one would become leader and then all is fine, if not, shut all down and start
another replica first and repeat.
Regards,
Markus
-Original message-
> From:Dasarathi Minjur
> Sent: Monday 15th October 2018 21:30
> To: solr-user@lucene.ap
We have a Hadoop cluster with Solr 6.3 running as service. After an OS
security patching, when the cluster was restarted, Solr Cloud is up but the
shards are down all the time. No specific messages in Solr.log or console
logs. Tried restarting solr but that didn't help. Any pointers to get the
shar
[mailto:jack.krupan...@gmail.com]
Sent: 08 January 2015 22:17
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Determining the Number of Solr Shards
My final advice would be my standard proof of concept implementation advice
- test a configuration with 10% (or 5%) of the target data size and 10% (or
5%) of the
On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 22:55 +0100, Nishanth S wrote:
> Thanks guys for your inputs I would be looking at around 100 Tb of total
> index size with 5100 million documents [...]
That is a large corpus when coupled with your high indexing & QPS
requirements. Are the queries complex too? Will you be
My final advice would be my standard proof of concept implementation advice
- test a configuration with 10% (or 5%) of the target data size and 10% (or
5%) of the estimated resource requirements (maybe 25% of the estimated RAM)
and see how well it performs.
Take the actual index size and multiply
Thanks guys for your inputs I would be looking at around 100 Tb of total
index size with 5100 million documents for a period of 30 days before
we purge the indexes.I had estimated it slightly on the higher side of
things but that's where I feel we would be.
Thanks,
Nishanth
On Wed, Jan 7,
On 1/7/2015 7:14 PM, Nishanth S wrote:
> Thanks Shawn and Walter.Yes those are 12,000 writes/second.Reads for the
> moment would be in the 1000 reads/second. Guess finding out the right
> number of shards would be my starting point.
I don't think indexing 12000 docs per second would be too much
Anybody on the list have a feel for how many simultaneous queries Solr can
handle in parallel? Will it be linear WRT the number of CPU cores? Or are
their other bottlenecks or locks in Lucene or Solr such that even with more
CPU cores the Solr server will be saturated with fewer queries than the
nu
1,000 queries/second is not trivial either. My starting point for QPS
is about 50.
But that's entirely "straw man" and (and as the link Shawn provided indicates)
only testing will determine if that's realistic.
So going for 1,000 queries/second, you're talking 20 replicas for
each shard.
And
Thanks Shawn and Walter.Yes those are 12,000 writes/second.Reads for the
moment would be in the 1000 reads/second. Guess finding out the right
number of shards would be my starting point.
Thanks,
Nishanth
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Walter Underwood
wrote:
> This is described as “write
This is described as “write heavy”, so I think that is 12,000 writes/second,
not queries.
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/
On Jan 7, 2015, at 5:16 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 1/7/2015 3:29 PM, Nishanth S wrote:
>> I am working on coming up with a solr a
On 1/7/2015 3:29 PM, Nishanth S wrote:
> I am working on coming up with a solr architecture layout for my use
> case.We are a very write heavy application with no down time tolerance and
> have low SLAs on reads when compared with writes.I am looking at around
> 12K tps with average index size
Hi All,
I am working on coming up with a solr architecture layout for my use
case.We are a very write heavy application with no down time tolerance and
have low SLAs on reads when compared with writes.I am looking at around
12K tps with average index size of solr document in the range of 6kB.I
.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SOLR-shards-stay-down-forever-tp4173284p4173452.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
pdates in index.
>
> Anyway, thank u, now all new shards are active, so forgive me for my panic.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SOLR-shards-stay-down-forever-tp4173284p4173452.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
e
starting SOLR).
I just don't understand some logic with shards in SOLR - why are they down
after restart, if there wasn't any updates in index.
Anyway, thank u, now all new shards are active, so forgive me for my panic.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.
jh(4.10.1):C96957 _1ji(4.10.1):C71555 _1jk(4.10.1):C3270
> _1jl(4.10.1):C107854 _1jm(4.10.1):C107286 _1jn(4.10.1):C94250
> _1jo(4.10.1):C98851 _1jp(4.10.1):C88492)}
>
> But all shards remain down state.
>
> I tried to stop SOLR-1 (the one with problems), delete shards with
> DELETES
jo(4.10.1):C98851 _1jp(4.10.1):C88492)}
But all shards remain down state.
I tried to stop SOLR-1 (the one with problems), delete shards with
DELETESHARD command and then start it again - didn't help.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SOLR-shards-sta
do need separate queries.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Smitha Rajiv
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 1:31 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Querying from solr shards
Hi All,
Currently i am using solr legacy distributed configuration (not solr cloud,
single solr
Hi All,
Currently i am using solr legacy distributed configuration (not solr cloud,
single solr server with multiple shards).
I need to write a query to get one particular document (id specific) from
one shard and all documents from other shards.
Can you please help me to get this query right.
Shawn:
Thanks! Obviously a bad cut/paste on my part, you're absolutely correctl
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Toke Eskildsen
wrote:
> mukh@gmail.com [mukh@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mukesh Jha
> [me.mukesh@gmail.com] wrote:
>> In my solr cluster I've multiple shards and each shard
mukh@gmail.com [mukh@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mukesh Jha
[me.mukesh@gmail.com] wrote:
> In my solr cluster I've multiple shards and each shard containing
> ~500,000,000 documents total index size being ~1 TB.
> I was just wondering how much more can I keep on adding to the shard before
On 4/15/2014 10:44 PM, Mukesh Jha wrote:
> In my solr cluster I've multiple shards and each shard containing
> ~500,000,000 documents total index size being ~1 TB.
>
> I was just wondering how much more can I keep on adding to the shard before
> we reach a tipping point and the performance starts
So how can we answer this in a meaningful way? You haven't told us
anything except the number of docs. Are you running on a laptop or a
monster server? What kinds of queries are you executing? How much
memory to the JVM? What kinds of faceting are you doing? How many
unique fields per facet field?
My index size per shard varies b/w 250 GB to 1 TB.
The cluster is performing well even now but thought it's high time to
change it, so that a shard doesn't get too big
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Vinay Pothnis wrote:
> You could look at this link to understand about the factors that affec
You could look at this link to understand about the factors that affect the
solrcloud performance: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceProblems
Especially, the sections about RAM and disk cache. If the index grows too
big for one node, it can lead to performance issues. From the looks of it
Hi Gurus,
In my solr cluster I've multiple shards and each shard containing
~500,000,000 documents total index size being ~1 TB.
I was just wondering how much more can I keep on adding to the shard before
we reach a tipping point and the performance starts to degrade?
Also as best practice what
We would like to use HP SiteScope to monitor the availability of
the individual Solr shards. Any ideas on how we can do that? Is there a
shard based URL that is a sure shot of knowing that the shard is feeling
healthy?
Thanks! :)
replaced &shards=... by &shards.qt
It is working well.
Thanks a lot of your help.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Shards-multi-cores-and-reverse-proxy-tp4072094p4073543.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Shards-multi-cores-and-reverse-proxy-tp4072094p4073039.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Shards-multi-cores-and-reverse-proxy-tp4072094p4073039.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hello,
I have this kind of url :
"http://remoteserver/solr/leg0/select/?rows=10&version=2&fl=*
&shards=
remoteserver:80/solr/core0,
...
remoteserver:80/solr/core5,
...
remoteserver:80/solr/core9
&..
There is only ONE Solr instance with multiple cores (core0 to core9) on the
same server.
On 6/21/2013 3:32 AM, medley wrote:
> I have this kind of url :
>
> "http://remoteserver/solr/leg0/select/?rows=10&version=2&fl=*
> &shards=
> remoteserver:80/solr/core0,
> ...
> remoteserver:80/solr/core5,
> ...
> remoteserver:80/solr/core9
> &..
>
> There is only ONE Solr instance with
; Regards
> Medley
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Shards-multi-cores-and-reverse-proxy-tp4072094.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Shards-multi-cores-and-reverse-proxy-tp4072094.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
It worked ,i followed steps only difference i erased everything and started
from scratch again
> From: kalyan.ku...@live.com
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Solr Shards and ZooKeeper
> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:51:41 -0400
>
> Hi allI am trying to configure exter
Hi allI am trying to configure external zookeeper with solr instances which has
to have 2 shards.I tried the introductory solrcloud wiki page and lucidworks
solrcloud page it works just fine(embedded zookeeper),The problem i have is
start solr with 2 shards when i have external zookeeper,i cant
hema.xml) to set where to sink data in shard
2.2 use ip to insert local
In addition, if you set numshards with _field at the same time ,
compositerId will be used only.
Thanks.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-shards-tp4041704p4042903.html
Sen
邮件原件-
> 发件人: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com]
> 发送时间: 2013年2月21日 10:55
> 收件人: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> 主题: Re: solr shards
>
>
> On Feb 20, 2013, at 9:47 PM, Rollin.R.Ma (lab.sh04.Newegg) 41099 <
> rollin.r...@newegg.com> wrote:
>
> > I al
...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年2月21日 10:55
收件人: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
主题: Re: solr shards
On Feb 20, 2013, at 9:47 PM, Rollin.R.Ma (lab.sh04.Newegg) 41099
wrote:
> I also see " Concerning CloudSolrServer, there is a JIRA to make it hash and
> send updates to the "right" lea
On Feb 20, 2013, at 9:47 PM, Rollin.R.Ma (lab.sh04.Newegg) 41099
wrote:
> I also see " Concerning CloudSolrServer, there is a JIRA to make it hash and
> send updates to the "right" leader, but currently it still doesn't - it just
> favors leaders in general over non leaders currently. "
>
>
r.optimize();
solrServer.commit();
I also see " Concerning CloudSolrServer, there is a JIRA to make it hash and
send updates to the "right" leader, but currently it still doesn't - it just
favors leaders in general over non leaders currently. "
I wo
gt;
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-shards-tp4041704.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-shards-tp4041704.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ash ranges to partitions, but I am not sure whether or how solr 3.6
> supports this. For that matter, I don't know whether or how SolrCloud (that
> I understand is available only in solr4) supports this.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/
6.n3.nabble.com/Rolling-partitions-with-solr-shards-tp3986315.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Aha! See, Kuli, I wasn't making it up! ;)
Otis
Performance Monitoring for Solr / ElasticSearch / HBase -
http://sematext.com/spm
>
> From: Robert Stewart
>To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 11:23 AM
>Subj
t;
> >>> ____
> >>> From: Michael Kuhlmann <[hidden
> >>> email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3983692&i=1>>
>
> >>> To: [hidden email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=398369
gt;
>>> From: Michael Kuhlmann
>>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>>> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 10:21 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Solr Shards multi core slower then single big core
>>>
>>> Am 14.05.2012 16:18, sch
-
> http://sematext.com/spm
>
>
>
>>
>> From: Michael Kuhlmann
>>To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>>Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 10:21 AM
>>Subject: Re: Solr Shards multi core slower then single big core
>>
>>Am 14.05.2012 16:18, schri
hlmann
>To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 10:21 AM
>Subject: Re: Solr Shards multi core slower then single big core
>
>Am 14.05.2012 16:18, schrieb Otis Gospodnetic:
>> Hi Kuli,
>>
>> In a client engagement, I did see this (N shards on 1
Am 14.05.2012 16:18, schrieb Otis Gospodnetic:
Hi Kuli,
In a client engagement, I did see this (N shards on 1 beefy box with lots of
RAM and CPU cores) be faster than 1 big index.
I want to believe you, but I also want to understand. Can you explain
why? And did this only happen for single
n
>To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 7:56 AM
>Subject: Re: Solr Shards multi core slower then single big core
>
>Am 14.05.2012 13:22, schrieb Sami Siren:
>>> Sharding is (nearly) always slower than using one big index with sufficient
>>>
Am 14.05.2012 13:22, schrieb Sami Siren:
Sharding is (nearly) always slower than using one big index with sufficient
hardware resources. Only use sharding when your index is too huge to fit
into one single machine.
If you're not constrained by CPU or IO, in other words have plenty of
CPU cores
> Sharding is (nearly) always slower than using one big index with sufficient
> hardware resources. Only use sharding when your index is too huge to fit
> into one single machine.
If you're not constrained by CPU or IO, in other words have plenty of
CPU cores available together with for example se
Am 14.05.2012 05:56, schrieb arjit:
Thanks Erick for the reply.
I have 6 cores which doesn't contain duplicated data. every core has some
unique data. What I thought was when I read it would read parallel 6 cores
and join the result and return the query. And this would be efficient then
reading o
,localhost:9090/solr/book4,localhost:9090/solr/book5,localhost:9090/solr/book6
>
> >
> >
> > text^2.0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >title item_id author titleMinusAuthor
> >
> >
> > 4
> > *:*
> >
> > te
:9090/solr/book4,localhost:9090/solr/book5,localhost:9090/solr/book6
>
>
> text^2.0
>
>
>
>
>
> title item_id author titleMinusAuthor
>
>
> 4
> *:*
>
> text features name
>
> 0
>
> name
>
ame
regex
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Shards-multi-core-slower-then-single-big-core-tp3979115p3979243.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
distributed
query would have only the document count but no document result set?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-shards-tp3691370p3707471.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: Now in my case the indices are being built outside of Solr. So basically I
: create three sets of indices through Lucene API's. And at this point, I
: change the schema.xml and define the fields I have in these new indices. I
do you define a uniqueKey field in your schema.xml? does that field
indices have not been built through Solr itself but I believe that
is a moot point anyway (I might be wrong here). But the fact that the
individual queries to each instance do return the answer while the query
with shards does not is a mystery to me.
Thanks for the help.
Ramin
--
View thi
t match the
> numFound I get from the main solr server, given that i do not have any
> duplicate on the unique key.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Ramin
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-shards-tp3691370p3691370.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
individual numFound's seems to not match the
numFound I get from the main solr server, given that i do not have any
duplicate on the unique key.
Thanks in advance,
Ramin
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-shards-tp3691370p3691370.html
Sent from the Solr - Us
On 8/11/2010 3:27 PM, JohnRodey wrote:
1) Is there any information on preferred maximum sizes for a single solr
index. I've read some people say 10 million, some say 80 million, etc...
Is there any official recommendation or has anyone experimented with large
datasets into the tens of billions?
y
die, but I would still like to return results from the active shards.
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/General-questions-about-distributed-solr-shards-tp1095117p1095117.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
a slave with cores that hold
>>> complete indices or just their shards.
>>> Otis
>>>
>>> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
>>> Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>&g
that hold
>> complete indices or just their shards.
>> Otis
>>
>> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
>> Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message
>>&g
cene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Babak Farhang
>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Sent: Thu, June 24, 2010 6:32:54 PM
>> Subject: questions about Solr shards
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>
&g
r-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, June 24, 2010 6:32:54 PM
> Subject: questions about Solr shards
>
> Hi everyone,
There are a couple of notes on the limitations of this
> approach at
> target=_blank >http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DistributedSearch which I'm
> havi
Hi everyone,
There are a couple of notes on the limitations of this approach at
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DistributedSearch which I'm having trouble
understanding.
1. "When duplicate doc IDs are received, Solr chooses the first doc
and discards subsequent ones"
"Received" here is from the p
76 matches
Mail list logo
