Re monitoring IO activity.... iostat, vmstat, sar and such under Linux, for example.
Yes, Solr doesn't count how long it takes to send the response back to the client, so if the response is large and/or network is slow, the actual number is going to be higher than the number that Solr logs. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch ----- Original Message ---- From: Britske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 10:56:24 AM Subject: batch indexing takes more time than shown on SOLR output --> something to do with IO? I have a batch program which inserts items in a solr/lucene index. all is going fine and I get update messages in the console like: 14-jan-2008 16:40:52 org.apache.solr.update.processor.LogUpdateProcessor finish INFO: {add=[10485, 10488, 10489, 10490, 10491, 10495, 10497, 10498, ...(42 more) ]} 0 875 However, when timing this instruction on the client-side (I use SOlrJ --> req.process(server)) I get totally different numbers (in the beginning the client-side measured time is about 2 seconds on average but after some time this time goes up to about 30-40 seconds, altough the solr-outputted time stays between 0.8-1.3 seconds? Does this have anything to do with costly IO-activity that is accounted for in the SOLR output? If this is true, what tool do you recommend using to monitor IO-activity? Thanks, Geert-Jan -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/batch-indexing-takes-more-time-than-shown-on-SOLR-output----%3E-something-to-do-with-IO--tp14804471p14804471.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
