Hi, your JVM need more RAM. My setup works well with 10 Cores, and 300mio. docs, Xmx8GB Xms8GB, 16GB for OS. But it's how Bernd mentioned, the memory consumption depends on the number of fields and the fieldCache. Best Regards Vadim
2012/11/16 Bernd Fehling <bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de>: > I guess you should give JVM more memory. > > When starting to find a good value for -Xmx I "oversized" and set > it to Xmx20G and Xms20G. Then I monitored the system and saw that JVM is > between 5G and 10G (java7 with G1 GC). > Now it is finally set to Xmx11G and Xms11G for my system with 1 core and 38 > million docs. > But JVM memory depends pretty much on number of fields in schema.xml > and fieldCache (sortable fields). > > Regards > Bernd > > Am 16.11.2012 09:29, schrieb stockii: >> Hello. >> >> if my server is running for a while i get some OOM Problems. I think the >> problem is, that i running to many cores on one Server with too many >> documents. >> >> this is my server concept: >> 14 cores. >> 1 with 30 million docs >> 1 with 22 million docs >> 1 with growing 25 million docs >> 1 with 67 million docs >> and the other cores are under 1 million docs. >> >> all these cores are running fine in one jetty and searching is very fast and >> we are satisfied with this. >> yesterday we got OOM. >> >> Do you think that we should "outsource" the big cores into another virtual >> instance of the server? so that the JVM not share the memory and going OOM? >> starting with: MEMORY_OPTIONS="-Xmx6g -Xms2G -Xmn1G" >>
