On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Tom Burton-West <tburt...@umich.edu> wrote: > Thanks Mike, > > We run our Solr 3.x indexing with 10GB/shard. I've been testing Solr 4 > with 4,6, and 8GB for heap. As of Friday night when the indexes were about > half done (about 400GB on disk) only the 4GB had issues. I'll find out on > Monday if the other runs had issues. If we can go from 10GB in Solr 3.x to > 6GB with Solr 4.x, that will be a significant change.
OK. It would be good to know where all your RAM is being consumed, and how much of that is really the terms index: it ought to be a very small part of it. > With TermsIndexInterval we traded off less memory use for increased chance > of disk seeks and more data to be read per seek (and if I remember right, > that more data was scanned sequentially rather than binary searched.) > What is the trade-off when increasing the block size? It's exactly the same tradeoff: blocks will be larger, so there will be fewer blocks that the terms index must reference (making it smaller), but more scanning to find your exact term within a given block. Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
