lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <>
Subject RE: Solr spewage and dropped documents, while indexing
Date Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:33:35 GMT

I did a run of the proposed change and it did not help.  If anything, the system behaved worse
and generated many more 400's than before.  So, probably the change is having the intended
effect, but the extra file-deletion time is interfering even further with "solr keeping up".

Further analysis shows that there are actually two problems.  First problem is the fact that
perfectly reasonable documents sometimes generate 400's.  Second problem is the connection
reset (which is what actually kills the client), which could well be due to a socket timeout.
 The client reports this trace, which simply shows that the post response socket was closed
by somebody on the server end: Connection reset
        at HttpPoster.getResponse(
        at HttpPoster.indexPost(
        at ParseAndLoad$

Could the 400 error be due to a similar socket timeout issue?  Well, that would depend on
whether commons-fileupload is capable of silently eating socket exceptions, and instead truncating
the post it has partially received.  And, of course, on what jetty's default socket parameters
look like.  Can anyone save me some time and give me a pointer to where/how/what those parameters
are set to, for the example?


-----Original Message-----
From: Wright Karl (Nokia-S/Cambridge) 
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 11:24 AM
Subject: RE: Solr spewage and dropped documents, while indexing

Ah, the old "misleading documentation" trick!
I'll have to give this a try and see if my problem goes away.

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Mark Miller [] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: Solr spewage and dropped documents, while indexing

Hang on though - I saw a commons jira issue from 08 that claimed the 
javadoc for this class was misleading and there was no default cleaner 
set - that issue was resolved, but the javadoc *still* seemed to 
indicate there was a default cleaner in use ... so I wondered if the 
code had changed, or the javadoc was still misleading ...

Looking at getFileCleaningTracker(), it also says:

An instance of FileCleaningTracker, defaults to FileCleaner.getInstance().

But then looking at the code, I don't see how that is possible. It 
really appears to default to null (no cleaner).

So I ran a quick test, printing out the cleaning tracker, and it prints 

So, perhaps we try setting one and see where your problem is? It really 
appears the javadoc I'm seeing does not match the code.

- Mark

On 6/9/10 8:01 AM, wrote:
> Ok, that theory bites the dust then...
> I'll have to work on some diagnostics then to see why the content doesn't get added.
> Karl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Mark Miller []
> Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 10:39 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Solr spewage and dropped documents, while indexing
> On 6/9/10 6:01 AM, wrote:
>> but if I correctly recall how DiskFileItemFactory works, it creates
>> files and registers them to be cleaned up on JVM exit.  If that's the
>> only cleanup, that's not going to cut it for a real-world system.
> Class DiskFileItemFactory
> "Temporary files are automatically deleted as soon as they are no longer
> needed. (More precisely, when the corresponding instance of File is
> garbage collected.) Cleaning up those files is done by an instance of
> FileCleaningTracker, and an associated thread."

- Mark

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message