Ok, I thought may be an old jvm version was causing this, but this one is pretty recent.
I took a better look at indexing percolator queries and there is indeed a substantial difference in execution time comparing to indexing a regular document. When I disabled the size calculation (in the code) for percolator queries the execution between indexing a regular document and an percolator document is more or less the same. I opened an issue for this: https://github.com/elasticsearch/elasticsearch/issues/5339 On 4 March 2014 16:52, James Bathgate <[email protected]> wrote: > Martijn, > > I'm using Oracle Java 7u45 > > > On Tuesday, March 4, 2014 1:05:13 AM UTC-8, Martijn v Groningen wrote: > >> I see that you a lot of time is spend on just measuring how memory the >> query takes in memory and not parsing the query. I think this slowness >> might be jvm version dependent, what jvm version are you using? >> >> >> On 4 March 2014 01:33, James Bathgate <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Martijn, >>> >>> 1. Not running low at all. >>> 2. A regular document takes ~75ms. >>> 3. https://gist.github.com/julesbravo/9337810 >>> >>> It looks like it's definitely CPU bound. >>> >>> >>> On Monday, March 3, 2014 3:40:05 PM UTC-8, Martijn v Groningen wrote: >>> >>>> On top of just indexing a document, the top level 'query' field part >>>> gets parsed into a internal Lucene query. However I don't see why this >>>> should take a long time. >>>> >>>> Some questions: >>>> Are you running low on jvm memory? >>>> How long does it take to index a regular document? >>>> Can you run the hot threads api while indexing a percolator document? >>>> >>>> Martijn >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4 March 2014 00:25, James Bathgate <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What are the likely bottlenecks on indexing percolators? This is on a >>>>> Vagrant virtual machine with 2 GBs of RAM with 1GB for ES. I'm wondering >>>>> if >>>>> this won't be a problem on an EC2 instance. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, March 3, 2014 2:14:34 PM UTC-8, James Bathgate wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think so. This is on my local dev with nothing else running >>>>>> on the index. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, March 3, 2014 2:00:53 PM UTC-8, Binh Ly wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hmmmm not sure, I just tried this on ES 1.0.1 and Oracle Java >>>>>>> 1.7_u51 and here are my results: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Insert Percolator: >>>>>>> {"_index":"merchandising","_type":".percolator","_id":"1","_ >>>>>>> version":1,"created":true} >>>>>>> real 0m0.103s >>>>>>> user 0m0.015s >>>>>>> sys 0m0.000s >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is it possible that your index was just busy? >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "elasticsearch" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>>>> msgid/elasticsearch/5dc16213-ba8e-4d68-9518-0882bd26e294%40goo >>>>> glegroups.com. >>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Met vriendelijke groet, >>>> >>>> Martijn van Groningen >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Met vriendelijke groet, >> >> Martijn van Groningen >> > -- Met vriendelijke groet, Martijn van Groningen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CA%2BA76Tz2rkid%3D0a1Ar5oS2_R_yo%2BQG32XwYdgsWLdiOxws_O_Q%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
