Ok thanks, if it's the IO OS Disk cache, which would be my options? changing the disk to a faster one?
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Yonik Seeley < yonik.see...@lucidimagination.com> wrote: > At the Lucene level there is the term index and the norms too: > > http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/b5eee1fc75cc454c/caching_in_lucene > > But 50s? That would seem to indicate it's the OS disk cache and you're > waiting for IO. You should be able to confirm if you're IO bound by > simply looking at the CPU utilization during this 50s query. > > -Yonik > http://www.lucidimagination.com > > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Jonathan Ariel <ionat...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > yes of course. but in my case I'm not using filter queries nor facets. > > it is a really simple query. actually the query params are like this: > > ?q=location_country:1 AND category:377 AND location_state:"CA" and > > location_city:"Sacramento" > > > > location_country is an integer > > category is an integer > > location_state is a string > > and location_city is a string > > > > as you can see no filter query and no facets. and for this query the > first > > time that I execute it it takes almost 50s to run, while for the > following > > query: > > > > ?q=title_search:test > > > > title_search is a tokenized text field with a bunch of filters > > > > it takes a couple of ms > > > > I'm always talking about executing these queries the first time after > > restarting solr. > > > > I just want to understand the cause and be sure I won't have this > behaviour > > every time I commit or optimize. > > > > Jonathan > > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Uri Boness <ubon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> "Not having any facet" and "Not using a filter cache" are two different > >> things. If you're not using query filters, you can still have facet > >> calculated and returned as part of the search result. The facet > component > >> uses lucene's field cache to retrieve values for the facet field. > >> > >> > >> Jonathan Ariel wrote: > >> > >>> Yes, but in this case the query that I'm executing doesn't have any > facet. > >>> I > >>> mean for this query I'm not using any filter cache.What does it means > >>> "operating system cache can be significant"? That my first query > uploads a > >>> big chunk on the index into memory (maybe even the entire index)? > >>> > >>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Yonik Seeley > >>> <yo...@lucidimagination.com>wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> At 12M documents, operating system cache can be significant. > >>>> Also, the first time you sort or facet on a field, a field cache > >>>> instance is populated which can take a lot of time. You can prevent > >>>> slow first queries by configuring a static warming query in > >>>> solrconfig.xml that includes the common sorts and facets. > >>>> > >>>> -Yonik > >>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Jonathan Ariel <ionat...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Hi!Why would it take for the first query that I execute almost 60 > >>>>> seconds > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> to > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> run and after that no more than 50ms? I disabled all my caching to > check > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> if > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> it is the reason for the subsequent fast responses, but the same > >>>>> happens. > >>>>> I'm using solr 1.3. > >>>>> Something really strange is that it doesn't happen with all the > queries. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> It > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> is happening with a query that filters some integer and string fields > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> joined > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> by an AND operator. Something like A:1 AND B:2 AND (C:3 AND D:"CA") > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> (exact > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> match). > >>>>> My index is around 12000000M documents. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> > >>>>> Jonathan > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > >
