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 8C0A818097 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:10:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 66777 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2015 09:10:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 66685 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2015 09:10:34 -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 66673 invoked by uid 99); 28 Apr 2015 09:10:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:10:34 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: message received from 54.191.145.13 which is an MX secondary for solr-user@lucene.apache.org) Received: from [54.191.145.13] (HELO mx1-us-west.apache.org) (54.191.145.13) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:10:28 +0000 Received: from mail-qk0-f181.google.com (mail-qk0-f181.google.com [209.85.220.181]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 71D35205EB for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:10:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qkgx75 with SMTP id x75so76437078qkg.1 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 02:08:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=myntra.com; s=myntra; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=87ORFMyjhIs5/SCiaoy2EjRS35gSr2KRot4tUu/aAlg=; b=DziRgJ3F5or4N5Oc9vDsgou/MA4Hp+qBIvBPnGwlp6S9VKhn+pPJDcRj7DvJdfuUdf EifZqv1tFLOkpad0F7Sy2F6ELErEAa+k3ItCYru+RJ8X9F3s5Q3mLqgfKcH8iLcwdq05 CTLq0fL0Z6gLxDV1B6CCMmLowhl88+2E/Dw/M= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=87ORFMyjhIs5/SCiaoy2EjRS35gSr2KRot4tUu/aAlg=; b=ffq3ucVlFuWNanYT97PMOHNMr9iKNvN4zsZg0d/4RIuyIj+Q5roS4BJNXDNYaSKOLN KMUnG8zIu0ItprQJO5bLoh8MRBQFjX/slzfQ3EKEjc9rE6VzKGpwGcPPa0rTMcs6SrPj Y+rnlzVg8OKAJbwwtsFSjq65Hz+pxXgArkO2twL0SA5jEft6O6P9wtllgfEmrnaw3M0t CWj3ui2TNcBq8q9TB8oVYsI1DLoHqdrXab6cgjdz//IiB/HCpfhbBRCHOnzW0NwwcL2m dcJ0jhSxAkmDP2Iv4tj1wmLUth/NKstIb8PnqdJSQVKta+9Xgvu1CEXExuTifC4K6kPD PKLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnmq31mCwpzwXLvd2PeUXHDomoLeWnoJTcfzh+Msev96ps8zOytEfQopz4mTN75q86Anllc MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.20.207 with SMTP id 76mr17957136qku.46.1430212111129; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 02:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.213.36 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 02:08:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <553E5E10.60009@elyograg.org> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:38:31 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Solr node going to recovering state during heavy reindexing From: Gopal Jee To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11400532d671d60514c534e1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a11400532d671d60514c534e1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Thanks Shawn for the insight. WIll try your recommendations . Gopal On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Rajesh Hazari wrote: > thanks, i am sure that we have missed this command line property, this > gives me more information on how to use latest solr scripts more > effectively. > > > *Thanks,* > *Rajesh**.* > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Shawn Heisey > wrote: > > > On 4/27/2015 9:15 AM, Gopal Jee wrote: > > > We have a 26 node solr cloud cluster. During heavy re-indexing, some of > > > nodes go into recovering state. > > > as per current config, soft commit is set to 15 minute and hard commit > to > > > 30 sec. Moreover, zkClientTimeout is set to 30 sec in solr nodes. > > > Please advise. > > > > The most common reason for this is general performance issues that make > > some operations take longer than the zkClientTimeout. > > > > My first suspect would be long garbage collection pauses. This assumes > > you're not using a very recent version (4.10.x or 5.x) with the new > > bin/solr script, and your java commandline does not have any garbage > > collection tuning. The bin/solr script does a lot of GC tuning. > > > > The second suspect would be that you don't have enough RAM left for your > > operating system to cache your index effectively. > > > > It's possible to have both of these problems happening. These problems, > > and a few others, are outlined here: > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceProblems > > > > Thanks, > > Shawn > > > > > --001a11400532d671d60514c534e1--