Hi, You can MMAP a size bigger than your memory without having any problem. Part of your file will just not be loaded into RAM, because you don't access it too often.
If you are short in memory, consider deactivating page Host IO Caching, as it will be only redundant with your guest OS page cache. Regards, Paul On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Shawn Heisey <s...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 8/16/2013 1:02 PM, vibhoreng04 wrote: > >> I have a big index of 256 GB .Right now it is on one physical box of 256 >> GB >> RAM . I am planning to virtualize it to the size of 32 GB Ram*8 >> boxes.Whether the MMap will work regardless in this condition ? >> > > As far as MMap goes, if the operating system you are running is 64-bit, > your Java is 64-bit, and the OS supports MMap (which almost every operating > system does, including Linux and Windows), then you'd be fine. > > If you have the option of running Solr on bare metal vs. running on the > same hardware in a virtualized environment, you should always choose the > bare metal. > > I had a Solr installation with a sharded index. When I first set it up, I > used virtual machines, one Solr instance and shard per VM. Half the VMs > were running on one physical box, half on another. For redundancy, I had a > second pair of physical servers doing the same thing, each with VMs > representing half the index. > > That same setup now runs on bare metal -- the exact same physical > machines, in fact. The index arrangement is nearly the same as before, > except it uses multicore Solr, one instance per machine. > > Removing the virtualization layer helped performance quite a bit. Average > QTimes went way down and it took less time to do a full index rebuild. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > -- ______________________________________________ Masurel Paul e-mail: paul.masu...@gmail.com
