Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 99345 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2006 21:14:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Feb 2006 21:14:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 22375 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2006 21:14:47 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 22353 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2006 21:14:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 22340 invoked by uid 99); 23 Feb 2006 21:14:46 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:14:46 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of peterlkeegan@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.199 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.184.199] (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.199) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:14:45 -0800 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 50so145217wri for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:14:24 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=NXQWbbN0LhWgvnodxPUusK1t8J/3EUkDTW2R5sqwJT3YG6CEZ+4eSLPI5CQE88PcLgvrkvCiiZCkZ9p0sk0nBZL1z60x/aXcquWO+92B1mU3MCvSx0NyRjkCJbM9aCJz1jtzVmXu/Qw2yNKu9g+drYM2orbS6vD0/Fr+py5oUWc= Received: by 10.54.71.15 with SMTP id t15mr724423wra; Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:14:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.123.8 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:14:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 16:14:24 -0500 From: "Peter Keegan" To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Throughput doesn't increase when using more concurrent threads In-Reply-To: <88c6a6720602231148v520b3be6uab8cfd7fb48899a9@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_17007_16436157.1140729264160" References: <43D92935.1000809@apache.org> <43D92A28.6050501@apache.org> <43DD6821.8020302@nuix.com.au> <88c6a6720602231148v520b3be6uab8cfd7fb48899a9@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_Part_17007_16436157.1140729264160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Chris, I tried JRockit a while back on 8-cpu/windows and it was slower than Sun's. Since I seem to be cpu-bound right now, I'll be trying a 16-cpu system next (32 with hyperthreading), on LinTel. I may give JRockit another go around then. Thanks, Peter On 2/23/06, Chris Lamprecht wrote: > > Peter, > Have you given JRockit JVM a try? I've seen it help throughput > compared to Sun's JVM on a dual xeon/linux machine, especially with > concurrency (up to 6 concurrent searches happening). I'm curious to > see if it makes a difference for you. > > -chris > > On 2/23/06, Peter Keegan wrote: > > We discovered that the kernel was only using 8 CPUs. After recompiling > for > > 16 (8+hyperthreads), it looks like the query rate will settle in around > > 280-300 qps. Much better, although still quite a bit slower than the > > opteron. > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > On 2/22/06, Yonik Seeley wrote: > > > > > > Hmmm, not sure what that could be. > > > You could try using the default FSDir instead of MMapDir to see if th= e > > > differences are there. > > > > > > Some things that could be different: > > > - thread scheduling (shouldn't make too much of a difference though) > > > - synchronization workings > > > - page replacement policy... how to figure out what pages to swap in > > > and which to swap out, esp of the memory mapped files. > > > > > > You could also try a profiler on both platforms to try and see where > > > the difference is. > > > > > > -Yonik > > > > > > On 2/22/06, Peter Keegan wrote: > > > > I am doing a performance comparison of Lucene on Linux vs Windows. > > > > > > > > I have 2 identically configured servers (8-CPUs (real) x 3GHz Xeon > > > > processors, 64GB RAM). One is running CentOS 4 Linux, the other is > > > running > > > > Windows server 2003 Enterprise Edition x64. Both have 64-bit JVMs > from > > > Sun. > > > > The Lucene server is using MMapDirectory. I'm running the jvm with > > > > -Xmx16000M. Peak memory usage of the jvm on Linux is about 6GB and > 7.8GBon > > > > windows. > > > > > > > > I'm observing query rates of 330 queries/sec on the Wintel server, > but > > > only > > > > 200 qps on the Linux box. At first, I suspected a network > bottleneck, > > > but > > > > when I 'short-circuited' Lucene, the query rates were identical. > > > > > > > > I suspect that there are some things to be tuned in Linux, but I'm > not > > > sure > > > > what. Any advice would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 1/30/06, Peter Keegan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I cranked up the dial on my query tester and was able to get the > rate > > > up > > > > > to 325 qps. Unfortunately, the machine died shortly thereafter > (memory > > > > > errors :-( ) Hopefully, it was just a coincidence. I haven't > measured > > > 64-bit > > > > > indexing speed, yet. > > > > > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > On 1/29/06, Daniel Noll wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Keegan wrote: > > > > > > > I tried the AMD64-bit JVM from Sun and with MMapDirectory and > I'm > > > now > > > > > > > getting 250 queries/sec and excellent cpu utilization (equal > > > > > > concurrency on > > > > > > > all cpus)!! Yonik, thanks for the pointer to the 64-bit jvm. = I > > > wasn't > > > > > > aware > > > > > > > of it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow. That's fast. > > > > > > > > > > > > Out of interest, does indexing time speed up much on 64-bit > > > hardware? > > > > > > I'm particularly interested in this side of things because for > our > > > own > > > > > > application, any query response under half a second is good > enough, > > > but > > > > > > the indexing side could always be faster. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Daniel Noll > > > > > > > > > > > > Nuix Australia Pty Ltd > > > > > > Suite 79, 89 Jones St, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia > > > > > > Phone: (02) 9280 0699 > > > > > > Fax: (02) 9212 6902 > > > > > > > > > > > > This message is intended only for the named recipient. If you > are > > > not > > > > > > the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, > copying, > > > > > > distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents o= f > > > this > > > > > > message or attachment is strictly prohibited. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > ------=_Part_17007_16436157.1140729264160--