What was your bottleneck when maxing on 30QPS on 3 node cluster? I expect such tests to vary quite much between use cases, so a good approach is to do just as you did: benchmark on your specific data and usage.
-- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > 27. aug. 2018 kl. 10:45 skrev Bernd Fehling <bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de>: > > My tests with many combinations (instance, node, core) on a 3 server cluster > with SolrCloud pointed out that highest performance is with multiple solr > instances and shards and replicas placed by rules so that you get advantage > from preferLocalShards=true. > > The disadvantage ist the handling of the system, which means setup, starting > and stopping, setting up the shards and replicas with rules and so on. > > I tested with 3x3 SolrCloud (3 shards, 3 replicas). > A 3x3 system with one instance and 3 cores per host could handle up to 30QPS. > A 3x3 system with multi instance (different ports, single core and shard per > instance) could handle 60QPS on same hardware with same data. > > Also, the single instance per server setup has spikes in the response time > graph > which are not seen with a multi instance setup. > > Tested about 2 month ago with SolCloud 6.4.2. > > Regards, > Bernd > > > Am 26.08.2018 um 08:00 schrieb Wei: >> Hi, >> I have a question about the deployment configuration in solr cloud. When >> we need to increase the number of shards in solr cloud, there are two >> options: >> 1. Run multiple solr instances per host, each with a different port and >> hosting a single core for one shard. >> 2. Run one solr instance per host, and have multiple cores(shards) in the >> same solr instance. >> Which would be better performance wise? For the first option I think JVM >> size for each solr instance can be smaller, but deployment is more >> complicated? Are there any differences for cpu utilization? >> Thanks, >> Wei
