Well, My index is already broken to 16 shards... The behaviour I supposed - It absolutely doesn't happen... Right? Does it make sense somehow as an improvement request? Technically, Can multiple Lucene responses be intersected this way?
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Mingfeng Yang <mfy...@wisewindow.com>wrote: > In your case, since there is no co-current queries, adding replicas won't > help much on improving the response speed. However, break your index into > a few shards do help increase query performance. I recently break an index > with 30 million documents (30G) into 4 shards, and the boost is pretty > impressive (roughly 2-5x faster for a complicated query) > > Ming > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Isaac Hebsh <isaac.he...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Does adding replicas (on additional servers) help to improve search > > performance? > > > > It is known that each query goes to all the shards. It's clear that if we > > have massive load, then multiple cores serving the same shard are very > > useful. > > > > But what happens if I'll never have concurrent queries (one query is in > the > > system at any time), but I want these single queries to return faster. > Is a > > bigger replication factor will contribute? > > > > Especially, Will a complicated query (with a large amount of queried > > fields) go to multiple cores *of the same shard*? (E.g. core1 searching > for > > term1 in field1, and core2 searching for term 2 in field2) > > > > And what about a query on a single field, which contains a lot of terms? > > > > Thanks in advance.. > > >
