ything related in the docs or the mailing list either,
>> but I'm still not ready to discard this suspicion...
>>
>> Again, thx for your time
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble
>> .com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184p4329367.html
>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
ian Hoxha wrote
> > I don't know about static/dynamic memory-issue though.
>
> I could not find anything related in the docs or the mailing list either,
> but I'm still not ready to discard this suspicion...
>
> Again, thx for your time
>
>
>
> --
> View thi
d this suspicion...
Again, thx for your time
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184p4329367.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
->30GB so you're guaranteed to get
> > pointer compression. I think you should have no need to increase it more
> > than this, since most things have moved to out-of-heap stuff, like
> > docValues etc.
>
> I was forced to raise the heap size because the memory requirements
&
heap size because the memory requirements
dramatically raised, hence this post :)
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184p4329345.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
and CPU utilization rate of about 10%, while I have only one
>> worker for schemaless data with a CPU utilization cost of about 20%.
>>
>> So, I have a two big questions here:
>> 1. Is this dramatic rise in resources consumption when using dynamic
>> fields
>> "normal"?
>> 2. Is there a way to lower the memory requirements? If so, how?
>>
>> Thanks for your time!
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble
>> .com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184.html
>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
dynamic fields
> "normal"?
> 2. Is there a way to lower the memory requirements? If so, how?
>
> Thanks for your time!
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble
> .com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
rise in resources consumption when using dynamic fields
"normal"?
2. Is there a way to lower the memory requirements? If so, how?
Thanks for your time!
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Dynamic-schema-memory-consumption-tp4329184.html
Sent from the S
