Shawn Heisey commented on SOLR-11078:

bq. Also, when trie-fields were first deprecated in favor of point-fields, what 
was the thought process at that time?

Solr has merely been reacting to realities forced on it by changes in Lucene.

Points were introduced to Lucene in the 6.x timeframe, I think it was 
relatively early.  Shortly afterwards, Lucene deprecated the legacy numeric 
code used by virtually every Lucene-based software in the world up through 
early 6.x, including Solr.  That legacy numeric code is completely gone from 
Lucene 7.0 and later.

Solr was a little bit slow to add support for point field types.  It didn't 
happen until late in the 6.x series.

In 7.0, Solr incorporated the legacy numeric code from Lucene necessary for 
Trie fields to function, because without it, Solr 7.0 would not have been able 
to read most existing 6.x indexes.  This is a temporary band-aid, which is 
expected to be removed in 8.0.  I'm really hoping that we can restore the 
performance of numeric field searching in some way before 8.0 comes out.  I do 
not know if the issues with Points can be fixed without reducing the 
performance of the things Points *are* good at.

> Solr query performance degradation since Solr 6.4.2
> ---------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: SOLR-11078
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11078
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>          Components: search, Server
>    Affects Versions: 6.6, 7.1
>         Environment: * CentOS 7.3 (Linux zasolrm03 3.10.0-514.26.2.el7.x86_64 
> #1 SMP Tue Jul 4 15:04:05 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux)
> * Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.121-b13, mixed mode)
> * 4 CPU, 10GB RAM
> Running Solr 6.6.0 with the following JVM settings:
> java -server -Xms4G -Xmx4G -XX:NewRatio=3 -XX:SurvivorRatio=4 
> -XX:TargetSurvivorRatio=90 -XX:MaxTenuringThreshold=8 -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC 
> -XX:+UseParNewGC -XX:ConcGCThreads=4 -XX:ParallelGCThreads=4 
> -XX:+CMSScavengeBeforeRemark -XX:PretenureSizeThreshold=64m 
> -XX:+UseCMSInitiatingOccupancyOnly -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=50 
> -XX:CMSMaxAbortablePrecleanTime=6000 -XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled 
> -XX:+ParallelRefProcEnabled -verbose:gc -XX:+PrintHeapAtGC 
> -XX:+PrintGCDetails -XX:+PrintGCDateStamps -XX:+PrintGCTimeStamps 
> -XX:+PrintTenuringDistribution -XX:+PrintGCApplicationStoppedTime 
> -Xloggc:/home/prodza/solrserver/../logs/solr_gc.log -XX:+UseGCLogFileRotation 
> -XX:NumberOfGCLogFiles=9 -XX:GCLogFileSize=20M 
> -Dsolr.log.dir=/home/prodza/solrserver/../logs -Djetty.port=8983 
> -DSTOP.PORT=7983 -DSTOP.KEY=solrrocks -Duser.timezone=SAST 
> -Djetty.home=/home/prodza/solrserver/server 
> -Dsolr.solr.home=/home/prodza/solrserver/../solr 
> -Dsolr.install.dir=/home/prodza/solrserver 
> -Dlog4j.configuration=file:/home/prodza/solrserver/../config/log4j.properties 
> -Xss256k -Xss256k -Dsolr.log.muteconsole 
> -XX:OnOutOfMemoryError=/home/prodza/solrserver/bin/oom_solr.sh 8983 
> /home/prodza/solrserver/../logs -jar start.jar --module=http
>            Reporter: bidorbuy
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: compare-6.4.2-6.6.0.png, core-admin-tradesearch.png, 
> jvm-stats.png, schema.xml, screenshot-1.png, screenshot-2.png, 
> screenshot-3.png, solr-6-4-2-schema.xml, solr-6-4-2-solrconfig.xml, 
> solr-7-1-0-managed-schema, solr-7-1-0-solrconfig.xml, solr-71-vs-64.png, 
> solr-sample-warning-log.txt, solr.in.sh, solrconfig.xml
> We are currently running 2 separate Solr servers - refer to screenshots:
> * zasolrm02 is running on Solr 6.4.2
> * zasolrm03 is running on Solr 6.6.0
> Both servers have the same OS / JVM configuration and are using their own 
> indexes. We round-robin load-balance through our Tomcats and notice that 
> Since Solr 6.4.2 performance has dropped. We have two indices per server 
> "searchsuggestions" and "tradesearch". There is a noticeable drop in 
> performance since Solr 6.4.2.
> I am not sure if this is perhaps related to metric collation or other 
> underlying changes. I am not sure if other high transaction users have 
> noticed similar issues.
> *1) zasolrm03 (6.6.0) is almost twice as slow on the tradesearch index:*
> !compare-6.4.2-6.6.0.png!
> *2) This is also visible in the searchsuggestion index:*
> !screenshot-1.png!
> *3) The Tradesearch index shows the biggest difference:*
> !screenshot-2.png!

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to