Shawn Heisey-2 wrote > On 9/22/2015 11:54 AM, vsilgalis wrote: >> I've actually read that article a few times. >> >> Yeah I know we aren't perfect in opening searchers. Yes we are committing >> from the client, this is something that is changing in our next code >> release, AND we are auto soft committing every second. >> >> > <filterCache class="solr.FastLRUCache" size="32768" initialSize="32768" >> > autowarmCount="256"/> >> > <queryResultCache class="solr.LRUCache" size="32768" initialSize="32768" >> > autowarmCount="256"/> >> > <documentCache class="solr.LRUCache" size="32768" initialSize="32768" >> > autowarmCount="256"/> > > Those are huge caches. Especially the filterCache, because each filter > entry can be megabytes in size, depending on how many documents are in > the core. If your index ever reaches the point where the filterCache > can grow to thousands of entries, your heap memory usage may grow out of > control. > > The documentCache cannot autowarm, so that autowarmCount setting is > irrelevant. The other two are important, and 256 is a pretty large > number for that setting. It is unlikely that your autowarming completes > in less than one second. > > I've repeated some of what Erick already told you, but I would like to > add the following. On your autoSoftCommit interval of one second, the > article that Erick linked has this to say: > > ------- > Set your soft commit interval to as long as you can stand. Don't listen > to your product manager who says "we need no more than 1 second > latency". Really. Push back hard and see if the /user/ is best served or > will even notice. Soft commits and NRT are pretty amazing, but they’re > not free. > ------- > > This autoSoftCommit interval, especially with large indexes, can cause a > performance death spiral. In SolrCloud, that death spiral tends to > cause constant replica recovery. A previous message you sent to the > list indicated that your shards are each 10GB in size, which counts as a > large index. Many people have indexes that are larger, but that's still > pretty big. > > Thanks, > Shawn
Thanks guys, this is exactly what I needed, something to dig into and follow up on. I do have question in regards to searcher warmup, when looking here: http://0.0.0.0.43:8080/solr/#/collections/plugins/core?entry=searcher is the warmuptime specific to the last searcher warmup time? Are there any other important things I can track with graphite? Thanks, Vytenis -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-4-10-2-Cores-in-Recovery-tp4230598p4230866.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
