Shawn,Thanks for your reply. All of these suggestions look like good ideas and I will follow up. We are running Solr via the Jetty process on windows as well as all of our zookeepers on the same boxes as the clouds. The reason for this is that we're on EC2 servers so it gets ultra expensive to have a 6 box setup just to have zookeepers on separate boxes from the solr instances. Each of our Windows boxes has 8GB of RAM, with roughly 35 - 40% of it still seemingly free. Is there a tool or some way we can identify for certain if we're running into memory issues?I like your zookeeper idea and I didn't know that this was feasible. I will get a test bed set up that way soon.As for indexes, each cloud has multiple collections but we're looking at the largest entire cloud (multiple indexes) being about 200MB, each collection is between 50 and 100MB and I don't see them getting much bigger than that per index (but I do see more indexes being added to the clouds).A few more questions:--Is there a definitive advantage to running Solr on a linux box over windows? I need to be able to justify the time and effort it will take to get up to speed on a non-familiar OS if we're going to go that route but if there's a good enough reason I don't see why not.--Would it be helpful to have the zookeeper ensemble on a different disk drive than the clouds? --Can the chattiness of all of the replication and zookeeper communication for multiple clouds/collections cause any of these issues (We do have some collections that are in constant flux with 1 - 5 requests each second, which we gather up and send to solr in batches of 250 documents or a 10 second flush)?Thanks again for your reply and suggestions, they are much appreciated.--Dave
-- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/4-3-Cloud-looks-good-on-the-outside-but-lots-of-errors-in-the-logs-tp4085806p4085984.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
