The HitCollector used by the Searcher is wrapped by a
TimeLimitedCollector
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc//org/apache/lucene/search/TimeLimitedCollector.html
which times out search requests that take longer than the maximum
allowed search time limit during the
Hi Jason,
I'd like to know how you solved the problem.
could you post the solution??
Thanks
Raúl
-Mensaje original-
De: Jason Rennie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jueves, 11 de septiembre de 2008 21:58
Para: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Asunto: Re: What's the bottleneck?
On Thu
I think you should justs break up your index across boxes and do a
federated search across them...
since you mentioned you have a single machine..
Jeryl Cook
/^\ Pharaoh /^\
http://pharaohofkush.blogspot.com/
Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our
enemies, justice will
Para: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Asunto: Re: What's the bottleneck?
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 1:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what is your index configuration???
Not sure what you mean. We're using 1.2, though we've tested with a recent
nightly and didn't see a significant change
few,
relatively
rare words, the query returns quickly. However, when the query is
longer
and uses more common words (hitting, say, ~1 million docs), it might
take
seconds to return. I'd like to know: what's the bottleneck? It
doesn't
seem to be disk---i/o wait times on the machine are much
Thanks for all the replies!
Mike: we're not using pf. Our qf is always status:0. The status field
is 0 for all good docs (90%+) and some other integer for any docs we don't
want returned.
Jeyrl: federated search is definitely something we'll consider.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Grant
Thanks for all the replies!
Mike: we're not using pf. Our qf is always status:0. The status field
is 0 for all good docs (90%+) and some other integer for any docs we don't
want returned.
Jeyrl: federated search is definitely something we'll consider.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Grant
]
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 2:17:28 PM
Subject: Re: What's the bottleneck?
Thanks for all the replies!
Mike: we're not using pf. Our qf is always status:0. The status field
is 0 for all good docs (90%+) and some other integer for any docs we don't
want
See also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-502 (timeout
searches)
and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-997
This is committed on trunk and will be in 1.3. Don't ask me how it
works, b/c I haven't tried it yet, but maybe Sean Timm or someone can
help out. I'm not sure
to return. I'd like to know: what's the bottleneck? It doesn't
seem to be disk---i/o wait times on the machine are much, much lower than on
our database servers (e.g. 3% vs. 50%). Our search server is an 8-core
machine and we do see cpu regularly holding above 100%, so cpu seems
plausible, but would
), it might take
seconds to return. I'd like to know: what's the bottleneck? It doesn't
seem to be disk---i/o wait times on the machine are much, much lower than on
our database servers (e.g. 3% vs. 50%). Our search server is an 8-core
machine and we do see cpu regularly holding above 100%, so cpu
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Mark Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What kind of traffic are you getting when it takes seconds? 1 request? 12?
I'd estimate concurrency around 3, though the speed doesn't change much when
we run the same query on a server with zero traffic.
Jason
for filter ...
-Mensaje original-
De: Jason Rennie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jueves, 11 de septiembre de 2008 17:25
Para: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Asunto: What's the bottleneck?
We have a 14 million document index that we only use for querying
(optimized, read-only
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 1:29 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what is your index configuration???
Not sure what you mean. We're using 1.2, though we've tested with a recent
nightly and didn't see a significant change in performance...
What is your average size form the returned fields ???
(hitting, say, ~1 million docs), it might
take
seconds to return. I'd like to know: what's the bottleneck? It
doesn't
seem to be disk---i/o wait times on the machine are much, much lower
than on
our database servers (e.g. 3% vs. 50%). Our search server is an 8-
core
machine and we do see cpu
15 matches
Mail list logo