lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Questions on FieldValueCache
Date Sat, 01 Aug 2009 06:29:38 GMT
Stephen,

Yes, *:* will work, or at least it did last time I tried it a few months ago.  This should
quickly warm up your OS disk cache.
Yes, if searcher warming takes too long, you may need to commit less frequently to avoid searcher
overlap.

 Otis
--
Sematext is hiring -- http://sematext.com/about/jobs.html?mls
Lucene, Solr, Nutch, Katta, Hadoop, HBase, UIMA, NLP, NER, IR



----- Original Message ----
> From: Stephen Duncan Jr <stephen.duncan@gmail.com>
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; yonik@lucidimagination.com
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 5:54:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Questions on FieldValueCache
> 
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> 
> >  > Ok, so that was the curiosity question.  More critical:
> > >
> > > When we first ask for facets for multi-valued fields, it can take up to
> > 25
> > > seconds to get the response, although after that it's very fast (1.5
> > seconds
> > > or less even for a lot of different facets) since the FieldValueCache has
> > > been populated.  Obviously, we'd like to get the FieldValueCache
> > populated,
> > > hopefully without an end-user being the one to wait 25 seconds.  I think
> > > this is what the autowarming settings are about, but I'm not sure how to
> > > warm the cache with the specific fields we expect facets to be requested
> > > for.  Any pointers?
> >
> > Use static warming queries.  autowarming doesn't hit the fieldValueCache.
> >
> > -Yonik
> > http://www.lucidimagination.com
> >
> 
> So in solrconfig.xml update the queries in newSearcher and/or(?)
> firstSearcher to include all the settings for a facet query with the desired
> facets?  Does the cache get populated if the query string is *:* (I don't
> want to risk a setup that doesn't hit any results and fails to populate the
> cache..).  If the warming query might now take 25 seconds (maybe more for
> more documents), I guess we might need to decrease the autocommit rate to
> cut down on chance of overlapping warmers?
> 
> -- 
> Stephen Duncan Jr
> www.stephenduncanjr.com


Mime
View raw message