sometorment later.... I found the reason ofsolr replication'slow speed. It's not solr's problem.It's jetty's. I used to embed jetty7 in my app. But when I found solr's demo use jetty6 , I tried to use jetty6 in my app and I was so happy to get the fast speed. actually, I tried to change solr's demo in jetty7 by default's conf, the replication's speed was slow too.
I don't know why the default jetty7 server is so slow. I wanna to find the reason.Maybe I can ask the jetty maillist or continue to read the codes. At 2010-11-02 07:28:54，"Lance Norskog" <goks...@gmail.com> wrote: >This is the time to replicate and open the new index, right? Opening a >new index can take a lot of time. How many autowarmers and queries are >there in the caches? Opening a new index re-runs all of the queries in >all of the caches. > >2010/11/1 kafka0102 <kafka0...@163.com>: >> I suspected my app has some sleeping op every 1s, so >> I changed ReplicationHandler.PACKET_SZ to 1024 * 1024*10; // 10MB >> >> and log result is like thus : >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:29][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3184 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:32][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3426 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:36][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3359 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:39][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3166 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:42][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3513 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:46][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3140 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:49:50][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1038)]readFully10485760 >> cost 3471 >> >> That means It's still slow like before. what's wrong with my env???? >> >> At 2010-11-01 17:30:32，kafka0102 <kafka0...@163.com> wrote: >> I hacked SnapPuller to log the cost, and the log is like thus: >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:19][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 979 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:19][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 4 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:19][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 4 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:20][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 980 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:20][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 4 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:20][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 5 >> [2010-11-01 >> 17:21:21][INFO][pool-6-thread-1][SnapPuller.java(1037)]readFully1048576 cost >> 979 >> >> >> It's saying it cost about 1000ms for transfering 1M data every 2 times. I >> used jetty as server and embeded solr in my app.I'm so confused.What I have >> done wrong? >> >> >> At 2010-11-01 10:12:38，"Lance Norskog" <goks...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>If you are copying from an indexer while you are indexing new content, >>>this would cause contention for the disk head. Does indexing slow down >>>during this period? >>> >>>Lance >>> >>>2010/10/31 Peter Karich <peat...@yahoo.de>: >>>> we have an identical-sized index and it takes ~5minutes >>>> >>>> >>>>> It takes about one hour to replacate 6G index for solr in my env. But my >>>>> network can transfer file about 10-20M/s using scp. So solr's http >>>>> replcation is too slow, it's normal or I do something wrong? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>Lance Norskog >>>goks...@gmail.com >> >> >> > > > >-- >Lance Norskog >goks...@gmail.com
