[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4930?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13630164#comment-13630164
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4930:
---------------------------------------
bq. Hi Uwe, would your proposed fix address the blocked threads in the trace
I've attached?
Yes, but its still strange that you see blocked threads at all. If you look at
ReferenceQueue's source code, posted above, the double-checked locking using a
volatile field would never run into the lock (if classes are not unloaded). The
Map is quasi static: the reference queue should never contain any entries -
this is strange here.
To your question: The problem is that StringField uses the internal
Field#StringTokenStream which is never ever reused. By using KeywordAnalyzer
inside Field.java this would be solved (with the cost of creating a
StringReader for every String).
> Lucene's use of WeakHashMap at index time prevents full use of cores on some
> multi-core machines, due to contention
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4930
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4930
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Affects Versions: 4.2
> Environment: Dell blade system with 16 cores
> Reporter: Karl Wright
> Attachments: thread_dump.txt
>
>
> Our project is not optimally using full processing power during under
> indexing load on Lucene 4.2.0. The reason is the
> AttributeSource.addAttribute() method, which goes through a WeakHashMap
> synchronizer, which is apparently single-threaded for a significant amount of
> time. Have a look at the following trace:
> "pool-1-thread-28" prio=10 tid=0x00007f47fc104800 nid=0x672b waiting for
> monitor entry [0x00007f47d19ed000]
> java.lang.Thread.State: BLOCKED (on object monitor)
> at java.lang.ref.ReferenceQueue.poll(ReferenceQueue.java:98)
> - waiting to lock <0x00000005c5cd9988> (a
> java.lang.ref.ReferenceQueue$Lock)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.WeakIdentityMap.reap(WeakIdentityMap.java:189)
> at org.apache.lucene.util.WeakIdentityMap.get(WeakIdentityMap.java:82)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.AttributeSource$AttributeFactory$DefaultAttributeFactory.getClassForInterface(AttributeSource.java:74)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.AttributeSource$AttributeFactory$DefaultAttributeFactory.createAttributeInstance(AttributeSource.java:65)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.util.AttributeSource.addAttribute(AttributeSource.java:271)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocInverterPerField.processFields(DocInverterPerField.java:107)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocFieldProcessor.processDocument(DocFieldProcessor.java:254)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriterPerThread.updateDocument(DocumentsWriterPerThread.java:256)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.updateDocument(DocumentsWriter.java:376)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.updateDocument(IndexWriter.java:1473)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:1148)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:1129)
> …
> We’ve had to make significant changes to the way we were indexing in order to
> not hit this issue as much, such as indexing using TokenStreams which we
> reuse, when it would have been more convenient to index with just tokens.
> (The reason is that Lucene internally creates TokenStream objects when you
> pass a token array to IndexableField, and doesn’t reuse them, and the
> addAttribute() causes massive contention as a result.) However, as you can
> see from the trace above, we’re still running into contention due to other
> addAttribute() method calls that are buried deep inside Lucene.
> I can see two ways forward. Either not use WeakHashMap or use it in a more
> efficient way, or make darned sure no addAttribute() calls are done in the
> main code indexing execution path. (I think it would be easy to fix
> DocInverterPerField in that way, FWIW. I just don’t know what we’ll run into
> next.)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
