Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 73821 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2009 14:26:26 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Apr 2009 14:26:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 29384 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2009 14:26:24 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 29327 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2009 14:26:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact solr-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list solr-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 29317 invoked by uid 99); 1 Apr 2009 14:26:24 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:26:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:26:16 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Lp1O8-000106-4Q for solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 07:25:56 -0700 Message-ID: <22827717.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 07:25:56 -0700 (PDT) From: sunnyfr To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: how to improve concurrent request performance and stress testing In-Reply-To: <20225293.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: johanna.34@gmail.com References: <15299687.post@talk.nabble.com> <20224787.post@talk.nabble.com> <20225293.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Thanks for all this help, But I guess it can't be optimal with a lot of update, my slave get back from the master 20 000docs updated every 20minutes, it's made to try to warmup have a big cache and everything go fast with that amount of update I guess ...? zqzuk wrote: > > Hi, > > try to firstly have a look at http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrCaching the > section on firstsearcher and warming. Search engines rely on caching, so > first searches will be slow. I think to be fair testing it is necessary to > warm up the search engine by sending most frequently used and/or most > costly queries, then start your stress testing. > > I used this tool http://code.google.com/p/httpstone/ to do stress testing. > It allows you to create multiple threads sending queries to a server > simultaneously, and records time taken to process each query in each > thread. > > Hope it helps. > > > > sunnyfr wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm trying as well to stress test solr. I would love some advice to >> manage it properly. >> I'm using solr 1.3 and tomcat55. >> Thanks a lot, >> >> >> zqzuk wrote: >>> >>> Hi, I am doing a stress testing of my solr application to see how many >>> concurrent requests it can handle and how long it takes. But I m not >>> sure if I have done it in proper way... responses seem to be very slow >>> >>> My configuration: >>> 1 Solr instance, using the default settings distributed in the example >>> code, while I made two changes: >>> true >>> 10 >>> As I thought the more searchers the more concurrent requests can be >>> dealt with? >>> >>> There are 1.1 million documents indexed, and the platform is winxp sp2, >>> duo core 1.8 GB machine with ram 2GB >>> >>> I used httpstone, a simple server load testing tool to create 100 >>> workers (so 100 threads) each issuing one same query to the server. To >>> deal with a single request of this query it took solr 2 seconds (with >>> facet counts), and 7 documents are returned. I was assuming that only >>> first request would take longer time and following requests should be >>> almost instantaneous as the query is the same. But strange that the >>> first response took as long as 20 seconds. >>> >>> It looked like that the 100 workers sent same request to solr and then >>> all of a sudden solr server went silent. Only after 20 seconds some of >>> these workers started to receive responses, but still very slow. >>> >>> clearly there I must have made something wrong with configuring solr >>> server... Could you give me some pointers on how to improve the >>> performance please? >>> >>> Many thanks! >>> >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/how-to-improve-concurrent-request-performance-and-stress-testing-tp15299687p22827717.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.