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 4BF301878B for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:45:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 13653 invoked by uid 500); 24 Aug 2015 23:45:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 13578 invoked by uid 500); 24 Aug 2015 23:45:09 -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 13566 invoked by uid 99); 24 Aug 2015 23:45:09 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:45:09 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1B8B01AAC07 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:45:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.107 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.107 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=elyograg.org Received: from mx1-us-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Aep53F7kfJut for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:45:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from frodo.elyograg.org (frodo.elyograg.org [166.70.79.219]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id B1484254F5 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 23:45:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frodo.elyograg.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FBD91E82 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:44:57 -0600 (MDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=elyograg.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:date:date:message-id:from:from :references:subject:subject:received:received; s=mail; t= 1440459897; bh=eO/CulZ8lbNMk41Ufr+pNq2PJf8i0LhTkIn2t6LUFX4=; b=g EaDaPms7FW4CN9v2o7hvIEfVtu5jF04QycHLH4Yi7A3KTVGhFw1ijTskchGl/v5u mdC3OA2D80kd2Xuq3jZ4MnfiHbDt50mpXbbIMnEkqV6C1NTIBpAdsftnbsWthCkP OAJ1OCLgDuhVMCd/LuBxHyWgyGZ7eMgk++8/qWXBiA= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at frodo.elyograg.org Received: from frodo.elyograg.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (frodo.elyograg.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 3qmuMpvp-7MJ for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:44:57 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [10.2.0.108] (client175.mainstreamdata.com [209.63.42.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: elyograg@elyograg.org) by frodo.elyograg.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 323021D0 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:44:57 -0600 (MDT) Subject: Re: Performance improvements To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org References: From: Shawn Heisey X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <55DBAC77.6070504@elyograg.org> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:44:55 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/24/2015 4:33 PM, naga sharathrayapati wrote: > In order to improve the query time of nested faceting query (json facet > api), have used 'docValues' in the schema,optimized index and increased > cache sizes(no evictions) > > I still cannot be bring the query time to less than 1 sec. > > is there anything that i can do that can improve the performance? Without specific information about your setup, I can only offer this: https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceProblems Did you completely reindex after you changed your schema to add docValues? I would not expect optimizing the index to be enough. https://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToReindex Other messages on the list from you say that you're running version 5.2.1. You're probably good on garbage collection tuning, unless you have changed how Solr is started. Thanks, Shawn