Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2BCB200BF1 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 12:52:16 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id D172E160B43; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:52:16 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 253B1160B33 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 12:52:15 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 73629 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jan 2017 11:52:15 -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 73617 invoked by uid 99); 3 Jan 2017 11:52:14 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:52:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 450FCC1C8F for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:52:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.68 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.68 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sjXc5cu3Eobw for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:52:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f173.google.com (mail-qt0-f173.google.com [209.85.216.173]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 6CA135F486 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:52:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f173.google.com with SMTP id p16so457171786qta.0 for ; Tue, 03 Jan 2017 03:52:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=T+6QkfawgMsSx6Gdy8feiru93M6p1TwNdsLoxi+OtgI=; b=s7N6vMqApebQMupXxTqMQT6xVGDYtKquceZNE3X/1qs63FXlzqK7s3u0jjXACcVBfp jncsMpjDBOl3QDoFl1hxSfZRokQi06VF+izFLDY9ljcOVzjf12z8r1CKW7VxBTxaI2+7 lsMdkoukl3ff42M0oxd/720OLSKFFzWCM8e8/4ri+sauIY3Qzok/WIgRDLnKtSlhKe50 ZRSoCS5WoNpD/RVIw99sIsXL2gMkeVzmzpK4QUCn/FG7E9siWrUuD9OHDV1W6xmO4PcL FE6T4XoAoidBKn7WgWLHk3KHaXk2WxMjgQbb2TrriPRx1sBygIye74e82vKUs/wVUwI7 GT4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=T+6QkfawgMsSx6Gdy8feiru93M6p1TwNdsLoxi+OtgI=; b=UdYUeIEmFbnS4b0q0J6WyRZJYIqh7pgpMjUdKKw3GWjp+3NY2aQ1W/8Pt6DJpPSp4Z 0kvzy/7GWTCIdOPGNA/2G0ifZ/shu6dgqpHLgv51b84mPcryyIJPFSGe1IGkn0WaIyFV lrSNPXpDtrimL2Pm0MJ4N8klYHpz253EkKflT5e46U/YCLxYuveEzAY/SSFQZb2fwJ8R a8v/nMSAF+EIf+zwfDVpHmw0ucFMWEBxKOgBUQHE/w2u87bQQUrujHSeEoBBdt/++TXh y4IZrOOjA8kKBWJzKsNG86+D0g5oSY6N3ZR5M/TOfEIb1e+b/B53SjivrFxr/QGZSvNy ARTw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXK5EzyWeE3vx01CarMWDnAn+6zrBAoh16hrDc11sSnFNR4c+yTBlW2lPWQm6xkP6ayZIzZWkH0nAUPG5A== X-Received: by 10.237.38.33 with SMTP id z30mr50502037qtc.285.1483444326963; Tue, 03 Jan 2017 03:52:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.55.128.133 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 03:52:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Rajnish kamboj Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 17:22:06 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: CPU usage 100% during search To: Lucene Users Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c12293c271f8d05452f4ce9 archived-at: Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:52:17 -0000 --94eb2c12293c271f8d05452f4ce9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 High CPU may be ideal, but 100% CPU utilization is not ideal. (We might be missing very silly thing) More information on our environment: Machine details: 4 vCPUs and 4 GB RAM Search Load: ~200 simultaneous users searching requests. Data set : 3.5 Million records (~ 2 GB index size). We reduced our data set to 25000, still CPU usage was very high, but throughput increases. Please advice, if we are missing any Lucene recommendations? On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Trejkaz wrote: > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Rajnish kamboj > wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > The CPU usage goes upto 100% during search. > > Isn't that ideal? Or would you prefer your searches to be slow, blocked by > I/O? > > TX > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > --94eb2c12293c271f8d05452f4ce9--