Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-20 Thread Erick Erickson
8 1:49 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0) > > On 1/19/2018 11:27 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: >> On 1/19/2018 8:54 AM, Pouliot, Scott wrote: >>> I do have a ticket in with our systems team to up the file handlers >>>

RE: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Pouliot, Scott
Heisey [mailto:apa...@elyograg.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 1:49 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0) On 1/19/2018 11:27 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > On 1/19/2018 8:54 AM, Pouliot, Scott wrote: >> I do have a ticket in with our sys

Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Shawn Heisey
On 1/19/2018 11:27 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: On 1/19/2018 8:54 AM, Pouliot, Scott wrote: I do have a ticket in with our systems team to up the file handlers since I am seeing the "Too many files open" error on occasion on our prod servers.  Is this the setting you're referring to?  Found we were

Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Shawn Heisey
On 1/19/2018 8:54 AM, Pouliot, Scott wrote: I do have a ticket in with our systems team to up the file handlers since I am seeing the "Too many files open" error on occasion on our prod servers. Is this the setting you're referring to? Found we were set to to 1024 using the "Ulimit" command.

RE: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Pouliot, Scott
replication? Solr itself seems > to be working like a champ, except when things get out of sync. > > Scott > > -Original Message- > From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:27 PM > To: solr-user <solr-user@lucene.a

Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Erick Erickson
Solr itself seems > to be working like a champ, except when things get out of sync. > > Scott > > -Original Message- > From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:27 PM > To: solr-user <solr-user@lucene.apache.

RE: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Pouliot, Scott
<solr-user@lucene.apache.org> Subject: Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0) Scott: We usually recommend setting files and processes very, very high. Like 65K high. Or unlimited if you can. Plus max user processes should also be bumped very high as well, like 65K as well. Plus max

Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Erick Erickson
on on our prod servers. > Is this the setting you're referring to? Found we were set to to 1024 using > the "Ulimit" command. > > -Original Message- > From: Shawn Heisey [mailto:apa...@elyograg.org] > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 10:48 AM > To: solr-user@lu

RE: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Pouliot, Scott
age- From: Shawn Heisey [mailto:apa...@elyograg.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 10:48 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0) On 1/19/2018 7:50 AM, Pouliot, Scott wrote: > So we're running Solr in a Master/Slave configuration (1 o

Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Shawn Heisey
On 1/19/2018 7:50 AM, Pouliot, Scott wrote: So we're running Solr in a Master/Slave configuration (1 of each) and it seems that the replication stalls or stops functioning every now and again. If we restart the Solr service or optimize the core it seems to kick back in again. Anyone have any

RE: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread Pouliot, Scott
Message- From: David Hastings [mailto:hastings.recurs...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 10:35 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0) This happens to me quite often as well. Generally on the replication admin screen it will say its

Re: Solr Replication being flaky (6.2.0)

2018-01-19 Thread David Hastings
This happens to me quite often as well. Generally on the replication admin screen it will say its downloading a file, but be at 0 or a VERY small kb/sec. Then after a restart of the slave its back to downloading at 30 to 100 mg/sec. Would be curious if there actually is a solution to this aside