<grin>. I've had recurring discussions with "executive level folks" that no matter how many VMs you host on a machine, and no matter how big that machine is, there really, truly, *is* some hardware underlying it all that really, truly, *does* have some limits.
And adding more VMs doesn't somehow get around those limits...... Good Luck! Erick On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Per Steffensen <st...@designware.dk> wrote: > Sami Siren skrev: > >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Per Steffensen <st...@designware.dk> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >>> Actually right now, I am trying to find our what my bottleneck is. The >>> setup >>> is more complex, than I would bother you with, but basically I have >>> servers >>> with 80-90% IO-wait and only 5-10% "real CPU usage". It might not be a >>> Solr-related problem, I am investigating different things, but just >>> wanted >>> to know a little more about how Jetty/Solr works in order to make a >>> qualified guess. >>> >> >> >> What kind of/how many discs do you have for your shards? ..also what >> kind of server are you experimenting with? >> > > Grrr, thats where I have a little fight with "operations". For now they gave > me one (fairly big) machine with XenServer. I create my "machines" as Xen > VM's on top of that. One of the things I dont like about this (besides that > I dont trust Xen to do its virtualization right, or at least not provide me > with correct readings on IO) is that disk space is assigned from an iSCSI > connected SAN that they all share (including the line out there). But for > now actually it doesnt look like disk IO problems. It looks like > networks-bottlenecks (but to some extend they all also shard network) among > all the components in our setup - our client plus Lily stack (HDFS, HBase, > ZK, Lily Server, Solr etc). Well it is complex, but anyways ... >> >> -- >> Sami Siren >> >> > >
