For reference I'm also on 1.1.0 but I'm not seeing more segments then I
expect.  I see an average of ~28 per shard on an index I write to
constantly.  I don't write all that quickly, < 50 updates a second.

Nik


On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Adrien Grand <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I managed to reproduce the issue locally, I'm looking into it.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Robin Wallin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We are experiencing a related problem with 1.1.0. Segments do not seem to
>> merge as they should during indexing. The optimize API does practically
>> nothing in terms of lowering the segments count either. The problem
>> persists through a cluster restart. The vast amount of segments seem to be
>> greatly impact the performance of the cluster, in a very negative way.
>>
>> We currently have 414 million documents across 3 nodes, each shard has in
>> average 1200 segments(!).
>>
>> With 1.0.1 we had even more documents, ~650 million, without any segment
>> problems. Looking in Marvel we were hovering at around 30-40 segments per
>> shard back then.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Robin
>>
>> On Friday, April 11, 2014 1:35:42 AM UTC+2, Adrien Grand wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for reporting this, the behavior is definitely unexpected. I'll
>>> test _optimize on very large numbers of shards to see if I can reproduce
>>> the issue.
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Elliott Bradshaw 
>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Adrien,
>>>>
>>>> Just an FYI, after resetting the cluster, things seem to have
>>>> improved.  Optimize calls now lead to CPU/IO activity over their duration.
>>>> Max_num_segments=1 does not seem to be working for me on any given call, as
>>>> each call would only reduce the segment count by about 600-700.  I ran 10
>>>> calls in sequence overnight, and actually got down to 4 segments (1/shard)!
>>>>
>>>> I'm glad I got the index optimized, searches are literally 10-20 times
>>>> faster without 1500/segments per shard to deal with.  It's awesome.
>>>>
>>>> That said, any thoughts on why the index wasn't merging on its own, or
>>>> why optimize was returning prematurely?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 11:10:56 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Adrien,
>>>>>
>>>>> I kept the logs up over the last optimize call, and I did see an
>>>>> exception.  I Ctrl-C'd a curl optimize call before making another one, but
>>>>> I don't think that that caused this exception.  The error is essentially 
>>>>> as
>>>>> follows:
>>>>>
>>>>> netty - Caught exception while handling client http traffic, closing
>>>>> connection [id: 0x4d8f1a90, /127.0.0.1:33480 :> /127.0.0.1:9200]
>>>>>
>>>>> java.nio.channels.ClosedChannelException at AbstractNioWorker.
>>>>> cleanUpWriteBuffer(AbstractNioWorker.java:433)
>>>>> at AbstractNioWorker.writeFromUserCode
>>>>> at NioServerSocketPipelineSink.handleAcceptedSocket
>>>>> at NioServerSocketPipelineSink.eventSunk
>>>>> at DefaultChannelPipeline$DefaultChannelhandlerContext.sendDownstream
>>>>> at Channels.write
>>>>> at OneToOneEncoder.doEncode
>>>>> at OneToOneEncoder.handleDownstream
>>>>> at DefaultChannelPipeline.sendDownstream
>>>>> at DefaultChannelPipeline.sendDownstream
>>>>> at Channels.write
>>>>> at AbstractChannel.write
>>>>> at NettyHttpChannel.sendResponse
>>>>> at RestOptimizeAction$1.onResponse(95)
>>>>> at RestOptimizeAction$1.onResponse(85)
>>>>> at TransportBroadcastOperationAction$AsyncBroadcastAction.finishHim
>>>>> at TransportBroadcastOperationAction$AsyncBroadcastAction.onOperation
>>>>> at TransportBroadcastOperationAction$AsyncBroadcastAction$2.run
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry about the crappy stack trace.  Still, looks like this might
>>>>> point to a problem!  The exception fired about an hour after I kicked off
>>>>> the optimize.  Any thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 10:06:57 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Adrien,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did customize my merge policy, although I did so only because I was
>>>>>> so surprised by the number of segments left over after the load.  I'm
>>>>>> pretty sure the optimize problem was happening before I made this change,
>>>>>> but either way here are my settings:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "index" : {
>>>>>> "merge" : {
>>>>>> "policy" : {
>>>>>> "max_merged_segment" : "20gb",
>>>>>> "segments_per_tier" : 5,
>>>>>> "floor_segment" : "10mb"
>>>>>> },
>>>>>> "scheduler" : "concurrentmergescheduler"
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not sure whether this set up could be a contributing factor or not.
>>>>>> Nothing really jumps out at me in the logs.  In fact, when i kick off the
>>>>>> optimize, I don't see any logging at all.  Should I?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm running the following command: curl -XPOST
>>>>>> http://localhost:9200/index/_optimize
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 8:56:35 AM UTC-4, Adrien Grand wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Elliott,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1500 segments per shard is certainly way too much, and it is not
>>>>>>> normal that optimize doesn't manage to reduce the number of segments.
>>>>>>>  - Is there anything suspicious in the logs?
>>>>>>>  - Have you customized the merge policy or scheduler?[1]
>>>>>>>  - Does the issue still reproduce if you restart your cluster?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/referenc
>>>>>>> e/current/index-modules-merge.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Elliott Bradshaw <[email protected]
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any other thoughts on this?  Would 1500 segments per shard be
>>>>>>>> significantly impacting performance?  Have you guys noticed this 
>>>>>>>> behavior
>>>>>>>> elsewhere?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 7, 2014 8:56:38 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Adrian,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I ran the following command:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> curl -XPUT http://localhost:9200/_settings -d
>>>>>>>>> '{"indices.store.throttle.max_bytes_per_sec" : "10gb"}'
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and received a { "acknowledged" : "true" } response.  The logs
>>>>>>>>> showed "cluster state updated".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I did have to close my index prior to changing the setting and
>>>>>>>>> reopen afterward.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've since began another optimize, but again it doesn't look like
>>>>>>>>> much is happening.  The optimize isn't returning and the total CPU 
>>>>>>>>> usage on
>>>>>>>>> every node is holding at about 2% of a single core.  I would copy a
>>>>>>>>> hot_threads stack trace, but I'm unfortunately on a closed network 
>>>>>>>>> and this
>>>>>>>>> isn't possible.  I can tell you that refreshes of hot_threads show 
>>>>>>>>> vary
>>>>>>>>> little happening.  The occasional [merge] thread (always in a
>>>>>>>>> LinkedTransferQueue.awaitMatch() state) or [optimize] (doing
>>>>>>>>> nothing on a waitForMerge() call) thread shows up, but it's always
>>>>>>>>> consuming 0-1% CPU.  It sure feels like something isn't right.  Any
>>>>>>>>> thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Adrien Grand <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Did you see a message in the logs confirming that the setting has
>>>>>>>>>> been updated? It would be interesting to see the output of hot 
>>>>>>>>>> threads[1]
>>>>>>>>>> to see what your node is doing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/referenc
>>>>>>>>>> e/current/cluster-nodes-hot-threads.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Elliott Bradshaw <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. I have run max_num_segments=1 every time.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Michael Sick <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Have you tried max_num_segments=1 on your optimize?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Elliott Bradshaw <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on this?  I've run optimize several more times,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the number of segments falls each time, but I'm still over 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1000
>>>>>>>>>>>>> segments per shard.  Has anyone else run into something similar?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 3, 2014 11:21:29 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK.  Optimize finally returned, so I suppose something was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happening in the background, but I'm still seeing over 6500 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> segments.  Even
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after setting max_num_segments=5.  Does this seem right?  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Queries are a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> little faster (350-400ms) but still not great.  Bigdesk is still 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> showing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fair amount of file IO.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:47:32 AM UTC-4, Elliott Bradshaw
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've recently upgraded to Elasticsearch 1.1.0.  I've got a 4
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> node cluster, each with 64G of ram, with 24G allocated to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elasticsearch on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each.  I've batch loaded approximately 86 million documents 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into a single
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index (4 shards) and have started benchmarking 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cross_field/multi_match
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> queries on them.  The index has one replica and takes up a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> total of 111G.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've run several batches of warming queries, but queries are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not as fast as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I had hoped, approximately 400-500ms each.  Given that *top
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *(on Centos) shows 5-8 GB of free memory on each server, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would assume that the entire index has been paged into memory 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (I had
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worried about disk performance previously, as we are working in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtualized environment).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A stats query on the index in questions shows that the index
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is composed of > 7000 segments.  This seemed high to me, but 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate.  Regardless, I dispatched an optimize command, but 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seeing any progress and the command has not returned.  Current 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merges
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remains at zero, and the segment count is not changing.  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checking out hot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> threads in ElasticHQ, I initially saw an optimize call in the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stack that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was blocked on a waitForMerge call.  This however has 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disappeared, and I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seeing no evidence that the optimize is occuring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does any of this seem out of the norm or unusual?  Has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyone else had similar issues.  This is the second time I have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tried to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> optimize an index since upgrading.  I've gotten the same result 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance for any help/tips!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Elliott
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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/5391291f-5c5
>>>>>>>>>>>>> e-4088-a1f2-93272beef0bb%40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/5391291f-5c5e-4088-a1f2-93272beef0bb%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elasticsearch/kqTRRADQBwc/
>>>>>>>>>>>> unsubscribe.
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an
>>>>>>>>>>>> email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAP8axnD7BUz
>>>>>>>>>>>> iGct2%3Db%3DfupaKYFnA5fR2TBsxHoURJumHSyODFA%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAP8axnD7BUziGct2%3Db%3DfupaKYFnA5fR2TBsxHoURJumHSyODFA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>>>>> 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/CAGCt%2BFvoS
>>>>>>>>>>> QTvv%2B6G%3D3GOX27AuYdEwLiW%3Demc0JTouT9%2BBeUk_A%40mail.gma
>>>>>>>>>>> il.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAGCt%2BFvoSQTvv%2B6G%3D3GOX27AuYdEwLiW%3Demc0JTouT9%2BBeUk_A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Adrien Grand
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic
>>>>>>>>>> in the Google Groups "elasticsearch" group.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elasticsearch/kqTRRADQBwc/
>>>>>>>>>> unsubscribe.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email
>>>>>>>>>> to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAL6Z4j6sQrP
>>>>>>>>>> jijV86nYGoGTAQ%3D3cO_pgyYE6%2B3sGjJPr8%2BKDsg%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAL6Z4j6sQrPjijV86nYGoGTAQ%3D3cO_pgyYE6%2B3sGjJPr8%2BKDsg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>> 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/8742280e-922
>>>>>>>> f-4e91-bcb2-6096ca0165e6%40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/8742280e-922f-4e91-bcb2-6096ca0165e6%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Adrien Grand
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  --
>>>> 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/344b09db-a2d8-4c2d-a917-dbf53eda03ce%
>>>> 40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/344b09db-a2d8-4c2d-a917-dbf53eda03ce%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Adrien Grand
>>>
>>  --
>> 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/eda52a43-94ec-4574-b989-32727cf3cfe4%40googlegroups.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/eda52a43-94ec-4574-b989-32727cf3cfe4%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien Grand
>
> --
> 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/CAL6Z4j7mYNrg1vVauWN8CyD-csXPqtdPad%3DC0QFiTyYOzsU2Bg%40mail.gmail.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elasticsearch/CAL6Z4j7mYNrg1vVauWN8CyD-csXPqtdPad%3DC0QFiTyYOzsU2Bg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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/CAPmjWd1f93pFKC0RqT40uFOg6Zwkn5UO0QNfeHHFGuYENwLD6w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to