Mike, Yonik, thanks for the quick reply.
> I think it is in your queries. Are you sorting on many
> fields? What is a typical query? I'm not a lucene expert,
> but there are lucene experts on this list.
Our queries do not sort by any field. However, we do make use of
FunctionQueries and a typical query is something like:
users_query AND (+linear_function_query +recip_function_query
+language:english^0 -flags:spam^0)
> 2) If your stored fields are very large, try reducing the
> size of the doc cache.
Is this what you mean? I'm testing with:
<documentCache
class="solr.LRUCache"
size="0"
initialSize="0"
autowarmCount="0"/>
> During warming, there are *two* searchers open, so double the
> number for things like the FieldCache. If you can accept
> slow first queries (like maybe in an offline query system)
> then you can turn off all warming.
Good point. I already tried to eliminate warming problems like this:
<filterCache
class="solr.LRUCache"
size="0"
initialSize="0"
autowarmCount="0"/>
<queryResultCache
class="solr.LRUCache"
size="0"
initialSize="0"
autowarmCount="0"/>
I know these changes make things slow, but I'm trying to eliminate as many
variables as possible.
I agree with Mike that the problem must be searches -- after all, the Solr
master works fine and it doesn't host searches. Is there a rule of thumb to
guesstimate the SolrIndexSearcher memory requirements?
Thanks again,
-Graham
