Hi, just curious, may I ask how did you come to the conclusion that the compression of fields is the cause of slowness in 9.4?
— > On 26 Jan 2024, at 23:13, Srijan <shree...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I stand corrected. Looks like my stored fields were compressed in Solr 8.11 > too. But something seems to have changed in 9.x. Decompression is awfully > slow. New algorithm? > > Regarding binary field, Solr doesn't allow docvalues for binary field (btw > Lucene does). So I tried using stored binary field but now I have to load > the entire document to read this one stored field (and I have tons of > stored fields) > > >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 2:44 PM Mikhail Khludnev <m...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Hello. >> Agreed. By default it's BEST_SPEED which is LZ4. So, it can't be faster >> or less compressive. Binary DocValues Field should be an answer. >> >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 9:41 PM Shawn Heisey <elyog...@elyograg.org.invalid >>> >> wrote: >> >>>> On 1/26/24 03:38, Srijan wrote: >>>> Since upgrading to Solr 9.x, I've observed a drastic decrease in >>>> performance – approximately 10 to 20 times slower than before. And this >>>> stems from the fact that stored fields in Solr 9.x are now compressed. >>>> Decompressing these fields during each search query has introduced a >>>> substantial performance overhead. >>> >>> Stored fields have been compressed since Solr 4.1.0. Unless you >>> upgraded from a VERY old version, stored field compression is unlikely >>> to be the source of your performance issue. >>> >>> You can have the source of the data uncompressed if you set stored to >>> false, docValues to true, and useDocValuesAsStored to true. Not all >>> fieldtype classes support docValues, though -- in particular TextField >>> does not. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Shawn >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Sincerely yours >> Mikhail Khludnev >>
