lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Webster Homer <>
Subject Re: solrcloud Auto-commit doesn't seem reliable
Date Mon, 12 Feb 2018 18:44:32 GMT
Erick, I am aware of the CDCR buffering problem causing tlog retention, we
always turn buffering off in our cdcr configurations.

My post was precipitated by seeing that we had uncommitted data in
collections > 24 hours after it was loaded. The collections I was looking
at are in our development environment, where we do not use CDCR. However
I'm pretty sure that I've seen situations in production where commits were
also long overdue.

the "autoSoftcommit" was a typo. The soft commit logic seems to be fine, I
don't see an issue with data visibility. But if 3 seconds is aggressive
what would be a  good value for soft commit? We have a couple of
collections that are updated every minute although most of them are updated
much less frequently.

My reason for raising this commit issue is that we see problems with the
relevancy of solrcloud searches, and the NRT replica type. Sometimes the
results flip where the best hit varies by what replica serviced the search.
This is hard to explain to management. Doing an optimized does address the
problem for a while. I try to avoid optimizing for the reasons you and Sean
list. If a commit doesn't happen how would there ever be an index merge
that would remove the deleted documents.

The problem with deletes and relevancy don't seem to occur when we use TLOG
replicas, probably because they don't do their own indexing but get copies
from their leader. We are testing them now eventually we may abandon the
use of NRT replicas for most of our collections.

I am quite concerned about this commit issue. What kinds of things would
influence whether a commit occurs? One commonality for our systems is that
they are hosted in a Google cloud. We have a number of collections that
share configurations, but others that do not. I think commits do happen,
but I don't trust that autoCommit is reliable. What can we do to make it

Most of our collections are reindexed weekly with partial updates applied
daily, that at least is what happens in production, our development clouds
are not as regular.

Our solr startup script sets the following values:

I don't think we reference  solr.autoCommit.maxDocs in our solrconfig.xml

here are our settings for autoCommit and autoSoftCommit

We had a lot of issues with missing commits when we didn't set


On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Shawn Heisey <> wrote:

> On 2/9/2018 9:29 AM, Webster Homer wrote:
>> A little more background. Our production Solrclouds are populated via
>> CDCR,
>> CDCR does not replicate commits, Commits to the target clouds happen via
>> autoCommit settings
>> We see relvancy scores get inconsistent when there are too many deletes
>> which seems to happen when hard commits don't happen.
>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Webster Homer <>
>> wrote:
>> I we do have autoSoftcommit set to 3 seconds. It is NOT the visibility of
>>> the records that is my primary concern. I am concerned about is the
>>> accumulation of uncommitted tlog files and the larger number of deleted
>>> documents.
> For the deleted documents:  Have you ever done an optimize on the
> collection?  If so, you're going to need to re-do the optimize regularly to
> keep deleted documents from growing out of control.  See this issue for a
> very technical discussion about it:
> Deleted documents probably aren't really related to what we've been
> discussing.  That shouldn't really be strongly affected by commit settings.
> -----
> A 3 second autoSoftCommit is VERY aggressive.   If your soft commits are
> taking longer than 3 seconds to complete, which is often what happens, then
> that will lead to problems.  I wouldn't expect it to cause the kinds of
> problems you describe, though.  It would manifest as Solr working too hard,
> logging warnings or errors, and changes taking too long to show up.
> Assuming that the config for autoSoftCommit doesn't have the typo that
> Erick mentioned.
> ----
> I have never used CDCR, so I know very little about it.  But I have seen
> reports on this mailing list saying that transaction logs never get deleted
> when CDCR is configured.
> Below is a link to a mailing list discussion related to CDCR not deleting
> transaction logs.  Looks like for it to work right a buffer needs to be
> disabled, and there may also be problems caused by not having a complete
> zkHost string in the CDCR config:
> the-transaction-log-files-td4345062.html
> Erick also mentioned this.
> Thanks,
> Shawn


This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or 
otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, 
you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to 
any other person. If you have received this transmission in error, please 
notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any attachment 
from your system. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its 
subsidiaries do not accept liability for any omissions or errors in this 
message which may arise as a result of E-Mail-transmission or for damages 
resulting from any unauthorized changes of the content of this message and 
any attachment thereto. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its 
subsidiaries do not guarantee that this message is free of viruses and does 
not accept liability for any damages caused by any virus transmitted 

Click to access the German, French, 
Spanish and Portuguese versions of this disclaimer.

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