[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11504?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16235255#comment-16235255
 ] 

Varun Thacker commented on SOLR-11504:
--------------------------------------

Related Jira LUCENE-5644

bq. For the purpose of fixing SOLR-11504, it seems enough to use a counting 
semaphore (or any similar structure) to control the flow of indexing requests 
from `DirectUpdateHandler2` to `IndexWriter`.

This comment also suggests a similar approach 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6659?focusedCommentId=14987090&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14987090

> Provide a config to restrict number of indexing threads 
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-11504
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11504
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>    Affects Versions: 5.3, 6.0, 7.0
>            Reporter: Nawab Zada Asad iqbal
>            Priority: Major
>   Original Estimate: 336h
>  Remaining Estimate: 336h
>
> For heavy indexing load (through REST api), Solr does not have any way to 
> restrict number of threads. There used to be a config in lucene to restrict 
> number of threads but that has been removed since 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6659 . 
> For example, in my bulk indexing scenario, within few minutes, my solr server 
> had created 300 parallel threads each writing its own segment. The result was 
> tons of small segments getting flushed to disk (as total RAM limit was 
> reached quickly by sum of all segments), and solr has to spend time later to 
> merge them into reasonable sizes. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to