Are you restricting the set of fields that you return from the queries? If not, it could be that you are returning fields that are potentially very large, and may affect query performance that way.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, michael.boom <my_sky...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you! > > I suspect that maybe my box was too small. > I'm upgrading my machines to more CPU & RAM and let's see how it goes from > there. > > Would limiting the number of returned fields to a smaller value would make > any improvement? > The behaviour I noticed was that: > at start=o&rows=10 avg qtime after 200queris was about 15ms > at start=o&rows=20 avg qtime after 200queris was about 20ms > at start=o&rows=30 avg qtime after 200queris was about 250ms and slowly > increasing. > at start=o&rows=50 avg qtime after 200queris was about 1400ms and > increasing > really fast. > > Tests were made using SolrMeter, using a set of keywords, each request > having specified the start=0&rows=N (N being one of the values above). So, > no deep paging, always requesting first N results, sorted by score. > > I will try again this scenario on the bigger boxes, and come back. > > > > ----- > Thanks, > Michael > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Performance-of-rows-and-start-parameters-tp4099194p4099370.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
