lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pravin Bhutada <pravin.bhut...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Solr 3.5 Optimization takes index file size almost double
Date Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:54:09 GMT
One thing that you can try is optimize incrementally. Instead of optimizing
to 1 segment, optimize to 100, then 50 , 25, 10 ,5 ,2 ,1
After each step, the index size should go down. This way you dont have to
wait 7 hours to get some results.


Pravin


On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Viresh Modi <
viresh.modi@highqsolutions.com> wrote:

> Hi pravin
>
> I have nearly 2 TB Disk space for optimization.And  after optimization get
> response of Qtime nearly 7hours (Obvious which  in milisecond).So i think
> not issue of disk space.
>
>
> Thanks&  Regards,
> Viresh modi
> Mobile: 91 (0) 9714567430
>
>
> On 14 June 2013 20:10, Pravin Bhutada <pravin.bhutada@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Viresh,
> >
> > How much free disc space do you have?  if you have dont have enough space
> > on disc, optimization process stops and rollsback to some intermediate
> > state.
> >
> >
> > Pravin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Viresh Modi <
> > viresh.modi@highqsolutions.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rafal
> > >
> > > Here i attached solr index file snapshot as well ..
> > > So can you look into this and any another information required
> regarding
> > > it then let me know.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks&  Regards,
> > > Viresh modi
> > > Mobile: 91 (0) 9714567430
> > >
> > >
> > > On 13 June 2013 17:41, Rafał Kuć <r.kuc@solr.pl> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello!
> > >>
> > >> Do you have some backup after commit in your configuration? It would
> > >> also be good to see how your index directory looks like, can you list
> > >> that ?
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Regards,
> > >>  Rafał Kuć
> > >>  Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - ElasticSearch
> > >>
> > >> > Thanks Rafal for reply...
> > >>
> > >> > I agree with you. But Actually After optimization , it does not
> reduce
> > >> size
> > >> > and it remains double. so is there any thing we missed or need to
do
> > for
> > >> > achieving index size reduction ?
> > >>
> > >> > Is there any special setting we need to configure for replication?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > On 13 June 2013 16:53, Rafał Kuć <r.kuc@solr.pl> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >> Hello!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Optimize command needs to rewrite the segments, so while it is
> > >> >> still working you may see the index size to be doubled. However
> after
> > >> >> it is finished the index size will be usually lowered comparing
to
> > the
> > >> >> index size before optimize.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Regards,
> > >> >>  Rafał Kuć
> > >> >>  Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - ElasticSearch
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > Hi,
> > >> >> > I have solr server 1.4.1 with index file size 428GB.Now When
I
> > >> upgrade
> > >> >> solr
> > >> >> > Server 1.4.1 to Solr 3.5.0 by replication method. Size remains
> > same.
> > >> >> > But when optimize index for Solr 3.5.0 instance its size
reaches
> > >> 791GB.so
> > >> >> > what is solutions for size remains same or lesser.
> > >> >> > I optimize Solr 3.5 with Query:
> > >> >> > <solr3.5 url>/update?optimize=true&commit=true
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > Thanks & regards
> > >> >> > Viresh Modi
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > This email and its attachments are intended for the above named only
> and
> > > may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no
> > > action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please
> > > reply to this email and highlight the error.
> > >
> >
>
> --
>
> ------------------------------
> This email and its attachments are intended for the above named only and
> may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no
> action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please
> reply to this email and highlight the error.
>

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