Bernd, But why do you have so many deletes? Is it expected? When you run DIHs concurrently, do you shard intput data by uniqueKey?
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Bernd Fehling < bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > If there is a problem in single index then it might also be in CloudSolr. > As far as I could figure out from INFOSTREAM, documents are added to > segments > and terms are "collected". Duplicate term are "deleted" (or whatever). > These deletes (or whatever) are not concurrent. > I have a lines like: > BD 0 [Wed Jul 27 13:28:48 GMT+01:00 2016; Thread-27879]: applyDeletes: > infos=... > BD 0 [Wed Jul 27 13:31:48 GMT+01:00 2016; Thread-27879]: applyDeletes took > 180028 msec > ... > BD 0 [Wed Jul 27 13:42:03 GMT+01:00 2016; Thread-27890]: applyDeletes: > infos=... > BD 0 [Wed Jul 27 14:38:55 GMT+01:00 2016; Thread-27890]: applyDeletes took > 3411845 msec > > 3411545 msec are about 56 minutes where the system is doing what??? > At least not indexing because only one JAVA process and no I/O at all! > > How can SolrJ help me now with this problem? > > Best > Bernd > > > Am 27.07.2016 um 16:41 schrieb Erick Erickson: > > Well, at least it'll be easier to debug in my experience. Simple example. > > At some point you'll call CloudSolrClient.add(doc list). Comment just > that > > out and you'll be able to isolate whether the issue is querying the be or > > sending to Solr. > > > > Then CloudSolrClient (assuming SolrCloud) has efficiencies in terms of > > routing... > > > > Best > > Erick > > > > On Jul 27, 2016 7:24 AM, "Bernd Fehling" <bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de > > > > wrote: > > > >> So writing some SolrJ doing the same job as the DIH script > >> and using that concurrent will solve my problem? > >> I'm not using Tika. > >> > >> I don't think that DIH is my problem, even if it is not the best > solution > >> right now. > >> Nevertheless, you are right SolrJ has higher performance, but what > >> if I have the same problems with SolrJ like with DIH? > >> > >> If it runs with DIH it should run with SolrJ with additional performance > >> boost. > >> > >> Bernd > >> > >> > >> On 27.07.2016 at 16:03, Erick Erickson: > >>> I'd actually recommend you move to a SolrJ solution > >>> or similar. Currently, you're putting a load on the Solr > >>> servers (especially if you're also using Tika) in addition > >>> to all indexing etc. > >>> > >>> Here's a sample: > >>> https://lucidworks.com/blog/2012/02/14/indexing-with-solrj/ > >>> > >>> Dodging the question I know, but DIH sometimes isn't > >>> the best solution. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Erick > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Bernd Fehling > >>> <bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > >>>> After enhancing the server with SSDs I'm trying to speed up indexing. > >>>> > >>>> The server has 16 CPUs and more than 100G RAM. > >>>> JAVA (1.8.0_92) has 24G. > >>>> SOLR is 4.10.4. > >>>> Plain XML data to load is 218G with about 96M records. > >>>> This will result in a single index of 299G. > >>>> > >>>> I tried with 4, 8, 12 and 16 concurrent DIHs. > >>>> 16 and 12 was to much because for 16 CPUs and my test continued with 8 > >> concurrent DIHs. > >>>> Then i was trying different <indexConfig> and <updateHandler> settings > >> but now I'm stuck. > >>>> I can't figure out what is the best setting for bulk indexing. > >>>> What I see is that the indexing is "falling asleep" after some time of > >> indexing. > >>>> It is only producing del-files, like _11_1.del, _w_2.del, _h_3.del,... > >>>> > >>>> <indexConfig> > >>>> <maxIndexingThreads>8</maxIndexingThreads> > >>>> <ramBufferSizeMB>1024</ramBufferSizeMB> > >>>> <maxBufferedDocs>-1</maxBufferedDocs> > >>>> <mergePolicy class="org.apache.lucene.index.TieredMergePolicy"> > >>>> <int name="maxMergeAtOnce">8</int> > >>>> <int name="segmentsPerTier">100</int> > >>>> <int name="maxMergedSegmentMB">512</int> > >>>> </mergePolicy> > >>>> <mergeFactor>8</mergeFactor> > >>>> <mergeScheduler > >> class="org.apache.lucene.index.ConcurrentMergeScheduler"/> > >>>> <lockType>${solr.lock.type:native}</lockType> > >>>> ... > >>>> </indexConfig> > >>>> > >>>> <updateHandler class="solr.DirectUpdateHandler2"> > >>>> ### no autocommit at all > >>>> <autoSoftCommit> > >>>> <maxTime>${solr.autoSoftCommit.maxTime:-1}</maxTime> > >>>> </autoSoftCommit> > >>>> </updateHandler> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > command=full-import&optimize=false&clean=false&commit=false&waitSearcher=false > >>>> After indexing finishes there is a final optimize. > >>>> > >>>> My idea is, if 8 DIHs use 8 CPUs then I have 8 CPUs left for merging > >>>> (maxIndexingThreads/maxMergeAtOnce/mergeFactor). > >>>> It should do no commit, no optimize. > >>>> ramBufferSizeMB is high because I have plenty of RAM and I want make > >> use the speed of RAM. > >>>> segmentsPerTier is high to reduce merging. > >>>> > >>>> But somewhere is a misconfiguration because indexing gets stalled. > >>>> > >>>> Any idea what's going wrong? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Bernd > >>>> > >> > > > > -- > ************************************************************* > Bernd Fehling Bielefeld University Library > Dipl.-Inform. (FH) LibTec - Library Technology > Universitätsstr. 25 and Knowledge Management > 33615 Bielefeld > Tel. +49 521 106-4060 bernd.fehling(at)uni-bielefeld.de > > BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine - www.base-search.net > ************************************************************* > -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev
