lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Rodenburg" <jeff.rodenb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Multiple indexes
Date Mon, 08 Jan 2007 18:53:14 GMT
This is good information, thanks Chris.  My preference was to keep things
separate, just needed some external info from others to back me up.

thanks,
jeff

On 1/7/07, Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org> wrote:
>
>
> I don't know if there really are any general purpose best practices ... it
> really depends on use cases -- the main motivation for allowing JNDI
> context specification of the solr.home location so that multiple instances
> of SOlr can run in a single instace of a servlet container was so that if
> you *wanted* to run multiple instances in a single JVM, they could share
> one heap space, and you wouldn't have to "guess" how much memory to
> allocate to multiple instances -- but wether or not you *want* to have a
> single instance or not is really up to you.
>
> the plus side (as i mentioned) is that you can throw all of your available
> memory at that single JVM instance, and not worry about how much ram each
> solr instance really needs.
>
> the down side is that if any one solr instance really gets hammered to
> hell by it's users and rolls over and dies, it could bring down your other
> solr instances as well -- which may not be a big deal if in your use cases
> all solr instances get hit equally (via a meta searcher) but might be
> quite a big problem if those seperate instances are completely independent
> (ie: each paid for by seperate clients)
>
> personally: if you've got the resources (money/boxes/RAM) i would
> recommend keeping everything isolated.
>
> (the nice thing about my job is that while i frequently walk out of
> meetings with the directive to "make it faster", I've never been asked to
> "make it use less RAM")
>
>
> -Hoss
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message