Tim: Thanks! Mostly I wrote it to have something official looking to hide behind when I didn't have a good answer to the hardware sizing question :).
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Tim Vaillancourt <t...@elementspace.com> wrote: > Fantastic article! > > Tim > > > On 5 October 2013 18:14, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> From my perspective, your question is almost impossible to >> answer, there are too many variables. See: >> >> http://searchhub.org/dev/2012/07/23/sizing-hardware-in-the-abstract-why-we-dont-have-a-definitive-answer/ >> >> Best, >> Erick >> >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Otis Gospodnetic >> <otis.gospodne...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > More CPU cores means more concurrency. This is good if you need to >> handle >> > high query rates. >> > >> > Faster cores mean lower query latency, assuming you are not bottlenecked >> by >> > memory or disk IO or network IO. >> > >> > So what is ideal for you depends on your concurrency and latency needs. >> > >> > Otis >> > Solr & ElasticSearch Support >> > http://sematext.com/ >> > On Oct 1, 2013 9:33 AM, "adfel70" <adfe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> hi >> >> We're building a spec for a machine to purchase. >> >> We're going to buy 10 machines. >> >> we aren't sure yet how many proccesses we will run per machine. >> >> the question is -should we buy faster cpu with less cores or slower cpu >> >> with more cores? >> >> in any case we will have 2 cpus in each machine. >> >> should we buy 2.6Ghz cpu with 8 cores or 3.5Ghz cpu with 4 cores? >> >> >> >> what will we gain by having many cores? >> >> >> >> what kinds of usages would make cpu be the bottleneck? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> View this message in context: >> >> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-cpu-usage-tp4092938.html >> >> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >>
