lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis.gospodne...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Master /Slave Architecture3.6.1
Date Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:11:41 GMT
Hi,

You are going in the right direction and your assumptions are correct. In
short, if the performance hit is too big then you simply need more ec2
instances (some have high cpu, some memory, some disk IO ... pick wisely).

Otis
Solr & ElasticSearch Support
http://sematext.com/
On Jan 10, 2013 4:44 AM, "Sujatha Arun" <suja.arun@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Our current architecture is as follows ,
>
>    - Single server  [ On which we do both Indexing and Searching]
>    - Solr version 3.6.1  Multicores
>    - We have several small & big indexes as cores within a webapp
>    - Our Indexing to the individual cores happen via an index queue ,due to
>    which at any given time ,we are indexing only to one or at most 2 cores
>    - Also we processing our pdf's and html files externally to text files
>    before feeding it to solr
>
>
> We are planning to move to the AWS using 3.6.1 and  would want to
>
>    -  Separate the  Indexing and  Searching to separate servers as master
>    /slave .This is mainly   so that the both the activities are not
> competing
>    for resources
>    - Also to use  Tika to process pdf and also to process html files
>    directly via solr ,which might increase the CPU load.
>    -  But ,if I set up so that all Indexing request are going to one server
>    sequentially and each core in slave polls the master core for index
> changes
>    ,and then issues a commit to load a new index reader,then all this
> activity
>    might happen in parallel which will actually spike the CPU activity on
>    slave and hence will degrade the search performance?
>
> Is this assumption correct?Then is there any advantage other
> than availability to this architecture ,any advice on this?
>
> Regards
> Sujatha
>

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