On 05.03.2018 11:07, azurIt wrote: >> Hi, >> >> we have activated fts-solr about a week ago and immediately started to >> experience really *low* performance with MOVE and EXPUNGE commands. >> After several days of googling, tcpdumping and straceing i was able to >> find and resolve the problem. >> >> We are using Dovecot 2.2.27 from Debian Jessie (jessie-backports), >> which is doing a soft commit in solr after every MOVE or EXPUNGE >> command - this behavior cannot be, currently, changed. The problem is >> that this was causing every MOVE/EXPUNGE to take about 6 seconds to >> complete. The problem appears to be in very old version of Solr - >> 3.6.2 (!!). This is the only version which is shipped with current >> (Jessie) and also next (Stretch) version of Debian, don't ask my why, >> i don't understand it either. Solr versions below 4.0 are NOT >> supporting soft commits, so all commits are hard and this was the >> problem. Finally, i decided to patch our Dovecot to not send a commit >> at all and everything started to be super fast. I'm doing hard commits >> every minute via cron so the only consequence of this is that you >> cannot search for messages delivered before less then a minute (which >> you, usually, don't need to do anyway). >> >> While googling i also find out that Solr supports autoCommit function >> (and from version 4.0 also autoSoftCommit), so there's no reason for >> Dovecot to handle this on it's own (and potentially doing hundreds or >> thousands of soft commits every second) - you can just set Solr to, >> for example, do autoSoftCommit every second and autoCommit every minute: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/UpdateHandlers+in+SolrConfig#UpdateHandlersinSolrConfig-autoCommit >> >> Also this wiki page should be updated with warning about old versoins >> of Solr not supporting soft commits (you could also mention the >> auto[Soft]Commit function): >> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Plugins/FTS/Solr >> >> I suggest to allow completely disable Solr commits in Dovecot by >> configuration, so people like me can handle this easily. What do you >> think? >> >> azur > > > > Hi, > > any news on this? Even Solr documentation suggests to NOT doing commits from > applications: > https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/shards-and-indexing-data-in-solrcloud.html#ShardsandIndexingDatainSolrCloud-IgnoringCommitsfromClientApplicationsinSolrCloud > > Thanks for not ignoring me. > > azur
You are not being ignored. We'll attend to this eventually. Aki
