Upping the number of concurrent warming searchers is almost always the wrong thing to do. I'd lengthen the polling interval or the commit interval. Throwing away warming searchers is uselessly consuming resources. And if you're trying to do any filter queries, your caches will almost never be used since you're throwing them away so often.
Best, Erick On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Shawn Heisey <s...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 9/26/2013 10:56 AM, Dmitry Kan wrote: >> >> Btw, related to master-slave setup. What makes read-only slave not to come >> across the same issue? Would it not pull data from the master and warm up >> searchers? Or does it do updates in a more controlled fashion that makes >> it >> avoid these issues? > > > Most people have the slave pollInterval configured on an interval that's > pretty long, like 15 seconds to several minutes -- much longer than a > typical searcher warming time. > > For a slave, new searchers are only created when there is a change copied > over from the master. There may be several master-side commits that happen > during the pollInterval, but the slave won't see all of those. > > Thanks, > Shawn >
