This is rather strange, not sure what's going on here, I'll have
to leave it to others to speculate I'm afraid...
Although I do wonder what a profiling tool would show.
Best,
Erick
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Jaroslaw Rozanski
wrote:
> Ok, so here is interesting
Ok, so here is interesting find.
As my setup requires frequent (soft) commits cache brings little value.
I tested following on Solr 5.5.0:
q={!cache=false}*:*&
fq={!cache=false}query1 /* not expensive */&
fq={!cache=false cost=200}query2 /* expensive! */&
Only with above set-up (and forcing
Hi Eric,
Measuring running queries via JMeter. Values provided are rounded median
of multiple samples. Medians are just slightly better than 99th
percentile for all samples.
Filter cache is useless as you mentioned; they are effectively not used.
There is auto-warming through cache autoWarm but
Well, the first question is always "how are you measuring this"?
Measuring a few queries is almost completely uninformative,
especially if the two systems have differing warmups. The only
meaningful measurements are when throwing away the first bunch
of queries then measuring a meaningful sample.
Hi all,
I am migrating a large Solr Cloud cluster from Solr 4.10 to Solr 5.5.0
and I observed big difference in query execution time.
First a setup summary:
- multiple collections - 6
- each has multiple shards - 6
- same/similar hardware
- indexing tens of messages per second
- autoSoftCommit