t; > What "design pattern" for timing did Linux violate? In other words, what
> > lesson should we be learning to assure that we don't have a similar
> problem
> > at an application level on a future leap second?
> >
> > -- Jack Krupansky
> >
> &g
cal.
>
> What "design pattern" for timing did Linux violate? In other words, what
> lesson should we be learning to assure that we don't have a similar problem
> at an application level on a future leap second?
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> -Original Message----- Fr
essage-
From: Óscar Marín Miró
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 11:02 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: leap second bug
Thanks Michael, nice information :)
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
Looks like this is a low-leve
Thanks Michael, nice information :)
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> Looks like this is a low-level Linux issue ... see Shay's email to the
> ElasticSearch list about it:
>
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/elasticsearch
Looks like this is a low-level Linux issue ... see Shay's email to the
ElasticSearch list about it:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/elasticsearch/_I1_OfaL7QY
Also see the comments here:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4182642
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemcca
Hello Michael, thanks for the note :)
I'm having a similar problem since yesterday, tomcats are wild on CPU [near
100%]. Did your solr servers did not reply to index/query requests?
Thanks :)
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Michael Tsadikov wrote:
> Our solr servers went into GC hell, and becam
