I am currently faceting on tokenized multi-valued field at
http://www.tokenizer.org (25 mlns simple docs)

It uses some home-made quick fixes similar to SOLR-475 (SOLR-711) and
non-synchronized cache (similar to LingPipe's FastCache, SOLR-665, SOLR-667)

Average "faceting" on query results: 0.2 - 0.3 seconds; without those
patches - 20-50 seconds.

I am going to upgrade to SOLR-1.4 from trunk (with SOLR-475 & SOLR-667) and
to compare results...




P.S.
Avoid faceting on a field with heavy distribution of terms (such as few
millions of terms in my case); It won't work in SOLR 1.3.

TIP: use non-tokenized single-valued field for faceting, such as
non-tokenized "country" field.



P.P.S.
Would be nice to load/stress
http://alias-i.com/lingpipe/docs/api/com/aliasi/util/FastCache.html against
putting CPU in a spin loop ConcurrentHashMap.



-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:ehatc...@apache.org] 
Sent: August-12-09 2:12 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: facet performance tips

Yes, increasing the filterCache size will help with Solr 1.3  
performance.

Do note that trunk (soon Solr 1.4) has dramatically improved faceting  
performance.

        Erik

On Aug 12, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Jérôme Etévé wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>  I'm using some faceting on a solr index containing ~ 160K documents.
> I perform facets on multivalued string fields. The number of possible
> different values is quite large.
>
> Enabling facets degrades the performance by a factor 3.
>
> Because I'm using solr 1.3, I guess the facetting makes use of the
> filter cache to work. My filterCache is set
> to a size of 2048. I also noticed in my solr stats a very small ratio
> of cache hit (~ 0.01%).
>
> Can it be the reason why the faceting is slow? Does it make sense to
> increase the filterCache size so it matches more or less the number
> of different possible values for the faceted fields? Would that not
> make the memory usage explode?
>
> Thanks for your help !
>
> -- 
> Jerome Eteve.
>
> Chat with me live at http://www.eteve.net
>
> jer...@eteve.net



Reply via email to