Also you should change the heap 32GB->30GB so you're guaranteed to get pointer compression. I think you should have no need to increase it more than this, since most things have moved to out-of-heap stuff, like docValues etc.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Dorian Hoxha <dorian.ho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Isn't 18K lucene-indexes (1 for each shard, not counting the replicas) a > little too much for 3TB of data ? > Something like 0.167GB for each shard ? > Isn't that too much overhead (i've mostly worked with es but still lucene > underneath) ? > > Can't you use 1/100 the current number of collections ? > > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:22 PM, jpereira <jpereira...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello guys, >> >> I manage a Solr cluster and I am experiencing some problems with dynamic >> schemas. >> >> The cluster has 16 nodes and 1500 collections with 12 shards per >> collection >> and 2 replicas per shard. The nodes can be divided in 2 major tiers: >> - tier1 is composed of 12 machines with 4 physical cores (8 virtual), >> 32GB >> ram and 4TB ssd; these are used mostly for direct queries and data >> exports; >> - tier2 is composed of 4 machines with 20 physical cores (40 virtual), >> 128GB and 4TB ssd; these are mostly for aggregation queries (facets) >> >> The problem I am experiencing is that when using dynamic schemas, the Solr >> heap size rises dramatically. >> >> I have two tier2 machines (lets call them A and B) running one Solr >> instance >> each with 96GB heap size, with 36 collections totaling 3TB of mainly >> fixed-schema (55GB schemaless) data indexed in each machine, and the heap >> consumption is on average 60GB (it peaks at around 80GB and drops to >> around >> 40GB after a GC run). >> >> On the other tier2 machines (C and D) I was running one Solr instance on >> each machine with 32GB heap size and 4 fixed schema collections with about >> 725GB of data indexed in each machine, which took up about 12GB of heap >> size. Recently I added 46 collections to these machines with about 220Gb >> of >> data. In order to do this I was forced to raise the heap size to 64GB and >> after indexing everything now the machines have an averaged consumption of >> 48GB (!!!) (max ~55GB, after GC runs ~37GB) >> >> I also noticed that when indexed fixed schema data the CPU utilization is >> also dramatically lower. I have around 100 workers indexing fixed schema >> data with and CPU utilization rate of about 10%, while I have only one >> worker for schemaless data with a CPU utilization cost of about 20%. >> >> So, I have a two big questions here: >> 1. Is this dramatic rise in resources consumption when using dynamic >> fields >> "normal"? >> 2. Is there a way to lower the memory requirements? If so, how? >> >> Thanks for your time! >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble >> .com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184.html >> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > >
