Hi, here is a short post describing the results of the yesterday run with added parameters as per Shawn's recommendation, have fun getting confused ;)
http://29min.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/measuring-solr-performance-ii/ roman On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Roman Chyla <roman.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'll try to run it with the new parameters and let you know how it goes. > I've rechecked details for the G1 (default) garbage collector run and I can > confirm that 2 out of 3 runs were showing high max response times, in some > cases even 10secs, but the customized G1 never - so definitely the > parameters had effect because the max time for the customized G1 never went > higher than 1.5secs (and that happend for 2 query classes only). Both the > cms-custom and G1-custom are similar, the G1 seems to have higher values in > the max fields, but that may be random. So, yes, now I am sure what to > think of default G1 as 'bad', and that these G1 parameters, even if they > don't seem G1 specific, have real effect. > Thanks, > > roman > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Shawn Heisey <s...@elyograg.org> wrote: > >> On 7/30/2013 6:59 PM, Roman Chyla wrote: >> > I have been wanting some tools for measuring performance of SOLR, >> similar >> > to Mike McCandles' lucene benchmark. >> > >> > so yet another monitor was born, is described here: >> > http://29min.wordpress.com/2013/07/31/measuring-solr-query-performance/ >> > >> > I tested it on the problem of garbage collectors (see the blogs for >> > details) and so far I can't conclude whether highly customized G1 is >> better >> > than highly customized CMS, but I think interesting details can be seen >> > there. >> > >> > Hope this helps someone, and of course, feel free to improve the tool >> and >> > share! >> >> I have a CMS config that's even more tuned than before, and it has made >> things MUCH better. This new config is inspired by more info that I got >> on IRC: >> >> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ShawnHeisey#GC_Tuning >> >> The G1 customizations in your blog post don't look like they are really >> G1-specific - they may be useful with CMS as well. This statement also >> applies to some of the CMS parameters, so I would use those with G1 as >> well for any testing. >> >> UseNUMA looks interesting for machines that actually are NUMA. All the >> information that I can find says it is only for the throughput >> (parallel) collector, so it's probably not doing anything for G1. >> >> The pause parameters you've got for G1 are targets only. It will *try* >> to stick within those parameters, but if a collection requires more than >> 50 milliseconds or has to happen more often than once a second, the >> collector will ignore what you have told it. >> >> Thanks, >> Shawn >> >> >
