Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBA06FFD3 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 25571 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2013 16:44:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 25505 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2013 16:44:02 -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 25467 invoked by uid 99); 16 Apr 2013 16:44:02 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:44:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.220.50] (HELO mail-pa0-f50.google.com) (209.85.220.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:43:56 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id bg2so440210pad.37 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:43:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=gBvyIxNB9Rcz2I2NbesZyvEB/M6iNfnW1hGdYNcWQsQ=; b=ONwG9mEqGkUP0ryqaO98KGIb1ujFqg0VniJrMqlbKoMYvWfO/SNGdDRT7kxX/MCQo3 nTPx6AGlaJG6J2MJTyccw3RqqhRXl161T+PB94Ycabr+LLE2+pGl0qW5TKRyCZPd8ZxB rpXShTRyDbFYpNnz1Ukj8a1/Yar7H6cGUCws+Lrxmv0G9AVjFtzbuRNf6NXUjlLR3bxk IFMvy33VKKRI57+lo4d4Y8t7ublIxf3XF4uWMRIdWXSaGTHzlbJWCdaG+WxJxUGZyGHW qOZ/WqY6aWEjgwEgAxB/e6TsVlQ70K8rh91te035Mn8hZswOzdBBIWyzBgkuiP1TiKbA qmWg== X-Received: by 10.68.179.101 with SMTP id df5mr4230984pbc.199.1366130614770; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.6] ([122.164.71.183]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id wi6sm2681052pbc.22.2013.04.16.09.43.32 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Subject: Re: CloudSolrServer vs ConcurrentUpdateSolrServer for indexing From: J Mohamed Zahoor In-Reply-To: <15E4174B-414F-4603-AE72-6B99F46460EA@indix.com> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:13:28 +0530 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <15E4174B-414F-4603-AE72-6B99F46460EA@indix.com> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlPunl3l/3AkqbH7ufFQtWqv+zfeUC15Uhw0xBV2SWiI2iU7K6ZyOTq0No+KLEwz2WMa74F X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org It sure increased the performance . Thanks for the input. ./zahoor On 14-Apr-2013, at 10:13 PM, J Mohamed Zahoor wrote: > Thanks.. > Will try multithreading with CloudSolrServer. >=20 > ./zahoor >=20 > On 13-Apr-2013, at 9:11 PM, Mark Miller wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> On Apr 13, 2013, at 11:07 AM, J Mohamed Zahoor = wrote: >>=20 >>> Hi >>>=20 >>> This question has come up many times in the list with lots of = variations (which confuses me a lot). >>>=20 >>> Iam using Solr 4.1. one collection , 6 shards, 6 machines. >>> I am using CloudSolrServer inside each mapper to index my = documents=85. While it is working fine , iam trying to improve the = indexing performance. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Question is: =20 >>>=20 >>> 1) is CloudSolrServer multiThreaded? >>=20 >> No. The proper fast way to use it is to start many threads that all = add docs to the same CloudSolrServer instance. In other words, = currently, you must do the multi threading yourself. CloudSolrServer is = "thread safe". >>=20 >>>=20 >>> 2) Will using ConcurrentUpdateSolr server increase indexing = performance? >>=20 >> Yes, but at the cost of having to specify a server to talk to - if it = goes down, so does your indexing. It's also not very great at reporting = errors. Finally, using multiple threads and CloudSolrServer, you can = approach the performance of ConcurrentUpdateSolr server. >>=20 >> - Mark >>=20 >>>=20 >>> ./Zahoor >>=20 >=20