Please see inline...
Deepak "Please stop cruelty to Animals, help by becoming a Vegan" +91 73500 12833 deic...@gmail.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/deicool LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/deicool "Plant a Tree, Go Green" On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 6:04 PM, BlackIce <blackice...@gmail.com> wrote: > Shawn: > well the idea was to utilize system resources more efficiently.. this is > not due so much to Solr, as I sayd I don't know that much about Solr, > except Shema.xml and Solarconfig.xml - However the main app that will be > running is more or less a single threated app which takes advantage when > run under several instances, ie: parallelism, so I thought, since I'm at it > I may give solr a few instances as well... but the more I read, the more > confused I get.. I've read about some guy running 8 Solr instances on his > dual Xeon 26xx series, each VM with 12 GB ram...... > > Deepak: > > Well its kinda a given that when running ANYTHING under a VM you have an > overhead.. ***Deepak*** You mean you are assuming without any facts (performance benchmark with n without VM) ***Deepak*** > so since I control the hardware, ie: not sharing space on some > hosted VM by some ISP... why not skip the whole VM thing entirely? > > Thnx for the Heap pointer.. I've read, from some Professor.. that Solr > actually is more efficient with a very small Heap and to have everything > mapped to virtual memory... Which brings me to the next question.. is the > Virtual memory mapping done by the OS or Solar? Does the Virtual memory > reside on the OS HDD? Or on the Solr HDD?.. and if the Virtual memory > mapping is done on the OS HDD, wouldn't it be beneficial to run the OS off > a SSD? > > ***Deepak*** The OS does mapping itself to virtual memory (Atleast Unix does). However am not sure of the internal mechanism of Solr ***Deepak*** > For now.. my FEELING is to run one Solr instance on this particular > machine.. by the time the RAM is outgrown add another machine and so > forth... ***Deepak*** I wonder if there are any performance benchmarks showing how Solr scales at higher loads on a single machine (is it linear or non linear). Most software don't scale linearly at higher loads ***Deepak*** > I've had a small set-back: due to the chasis configuration I could > only fit in Half of the HDD's I intented.. the rest collide with the CPU > heatsinks (Don't ask) > so my entire initial set-up has changed and with it my initial "growth > strategy" > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > > > On 3/14/2018 5:49 AM, BlackIce wrote: > > > >> I was just thinking.... Do I really need separate VM's in order to run > >> multiple Solr instances? Doesn't it suffice to have each instance in its > >> own user account? > >> > > > > You can run multiple instances all under the same account on one machine. > > But for a single machine, why do you need multiple Solr instances at all? > > One instance can handle many indexes, and will probably do it more > > efficiently than multiple instances. > > > > The only time I would *ever* recommend multiple Solr instances is when a > > single instance would need an ENORMOUS Java heap -- something much larger > > than 32GB. If something like that can be split into multiple instances > > where each one has a heap that's 31GB heap or less, then memory usage > will > > be more efficient and Java's garbage collection will work better. > > > > FYI -- Running Java with a 32GB heap actually has LESS memory available > > than running it with a 31GB heap. This is because when the heap reaches > > 32GB, Java must switch to 64-bit pointers, so every little allocation > > requires a little bit more memory. > > > > Thanks, > > Shawn > > > > >
