Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00486200CF7 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:12:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id F2A981609DD; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:11:59 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 456481609DB for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:11:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 73185 invoked by uid 500); 19 Sep 2017 08:11:52 -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 73130 invoked by uid 99); 19 Sep 2017 08:11:51 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:11:51 +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 8C8281A2797 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:11:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 3.486 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.486 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URI_HEX=1.313] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0bPl8DC7Bvpa for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from n3.nabble.com (n3.nabble.com [162.255.23.22]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id 29A4560D31 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from n3.nabble.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n3.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2DFD87222B4 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 01:11:48 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 01:11:48 -0700 (MST) From: shamik To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: <1505808708630-0.post@n3.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1505805507.11509.33.camel@kb.dk> References: <4440F0C3-659D-4B2D-B2E1-B35AE00BE99D@wunderwood.org> <1505746530208-0.post@n3.nabble.com> <1505750627860-0.post@n3.nabble.com> <1505792836254-0.post@n3.nabble.com> <1505805507.11509.33.camel@kb.dk> Subject: Re: Solr nodes crashing (OOM) after 6.6 upgrade MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit archived-at: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:12:00 -0000 Thanks, the change seemed to have addressed the memory issue (so far), but on the contrary, the GC chocked the CPUs stalling everything. The CPU utilization across the cluster clocked close to 400%, literally stalling everything.On a first look, the G1-Old generation looks to be the culprit that took up 80% of the CPU. Not sure what triggered really triggered it as the GC seemed to have stable till then. The other thing I noticed was the mlt queries (I'm using mlt query parser for cloud support) took a huge amount of time to respond (10 sec+) during the CPU spike compared to the rest. Again, that might just due to the CPU. The index might not be a large one to merit a couple of shards, but it has never been an issue for past couple of years on 5.5. We never had a single outage related to memory or CPU. The query/indexing load has increased over time, but it has been linear. I'm little baffled why would 6.6 behave so differently. Perhaps the hardware is not adequate enough? I'm running on 8 core / 30gb machine with SSD. -- Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html