lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sourajit Basak <sourajit.ba...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [blogpost] Memory is overrated, use SSDs
Date Sun, 09 Jun 2013 08:45:40 GMT
@Erick,
Your revelation on SSDs is very valuable.
Do you have any idea on the following ?

Does more processors with less cores or less processors with more cores
i.e. which of 4P2C or 2P4C has best cost per query ?

~ Sourajit


On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks for this, hard data is always welcome!
>
> Another blog post for my reference list!
>
> Erick
>
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Toke Eskildsen <te@statsbiblioteket.dk>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 07:15 +0200, Andy wrote:
> >> One question I have is did you precondition the SSD (
> http://www.sandforce.com/userfiles/file/downloads/FMS2009_F2A_Smith.pdf)? SSD performance
tends to take a very deep dive once all blocks are
> written at least once and the garbage collector kicks in.
> >
> > Not explicitly so. The machine is our test server with the SSDs in RAID
> > 0 with - to my knowledge - no TRIM support. They are 2½ year old and has
> > had a fair amount of data written and being 3/4 full most of the time.
> > At one point in time we experimented with 10M+ relatively small files
> > and a couple of 40GB databases, so the drives are definitely not in
> > pristine condition.
> >
> > Anyway, as Solr searches is heavy on tiny random reads, I suspect that
> > search performance will be largely unaffected by SSD fragmentation. It
> > would be interesting to examine, but for now I cannot prioritize another
> > large performance test.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your input. I will update the blog post accordingly,
> > Toke Eskildsen, State and University Library, Denmark
> >
>

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