From: Wayne G. <ws...@wm...> - 2008-05-30 14:37:33
|
I'm a little tardy, but I just wrote up a short-ish description on setting the JAVA_OPTIONS variable for tuning the JVM for Solr in the Performance section of the vufind wiki (http://vufind.org/wiki/performance). Has anyone needed/wanted to tune Jetty yet? Or are the defaults in there working ok for folks? Thanks, Wayne |
From: Mark T. <mt...@nl...> - 2008-05-30 21:56:58
|
Hi Wayne, The defaults have worked well for us so far. The only extra thing we've done (besides increasing the heap size) was add: -XX:NewRatio=5 We found that, with a 6 gig JVM, about 2 gigs of that was going to the young generation. Setting NewRatio as above pretty much halved that, giving the other gig back to the old generation pool. For us, this led to a pretty drastic drop in server load, so I guess we were spending a fair bit of time doing full GCs (or maybe it was just that scavenging the young generation was taking longer. Not sure) Cheers, Mark Wayne Graham <ws...@wm...> writes: > I'm a little tardy, but I just wrote up a short-ish description on > setting the JAVA_OPTIONS variable for tuning the JVM for Solr in the > Performance section of the vufind wiki (http://vufind.org/wiki/performance). > > Has anyone needed/wanted to tune Jetty yet? Or are the defaults in there > working ok for folks? -- Mark Triggs <mt...@nl...> |
From: Naomi D. <nd...@st...> - 2008-06-02 18:13:11
|
Mark, So you're using Jetty in production for both SOLR and for VuFind? Same instance for both? - Naomi On May 30, 2008, at 2:56 PM, Mark Triggs wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > The defaults have worked well for us so far. The only extra thing > we've > done (besides increasing the heap size) was add: > > -XX:NewRatio=5 > > We found that, with a 6 gig JVM, about 2 gigs of that was going to the > young generation. Setting NewRatio as above pretty much halved that, > giving the other gig back to the old generation pool. For us, this > led > to a pretty drastic drop in server load, so I guess we were spending a > fair bit of time doing full GCs (or maybe it was just that scavenging > the young generation was taking longer. Not sure) > > Cheers, > > Mark > > > Wayne Graham <ws...@wm...> writes: > >> I'm a little tardy, but I just wrote up a short-ish description on >> setting the JAVA_OPTIONS variable for tuning the JVM for Solr in the >> Performance section of the vufind wiki (http://vufind.org/wiki/performance >> ). >> >> Has anyone needed/wanted to tune Jetty yet? Or are the defaults in >> there >> working ok for folks? > > -- > Mark Triggs > <mt...@nl...> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > VuFind-General mailing list > VuF...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vufind-general Naomi Dushay nd...@st... |
From: Mark T. <mt...@nl...> - 2008-06-02 21:47:09
|
Hi Naomi, We're using Jetty in production for Solr, but we don't use it for the PHP side of things (is that what you mean?). Our PHP requests come in via Apache, get rewritten by the web/.htaccess file, and finally get farmed off to an external PHP FastCGI server to be handled. Cheers, Mark Naomi Dushay <nd...@st...> writes: > Mark, > > So you're using Jetty in production for both SOLR and for VuFind? > Same instance for both? -- Mark Triggs <mt...@nl...> |
From: Wayne G. <ws...@wm...> - 2008-06-03 13:16:47
|
Mark, Thanks for this. I was trying not to explain young generation ;) I updated the section on garbage collection and added a section on user contributed settings. Mind posting yours there? Also, are you using parallelgc or parnewgc? Wayne Mark Triggs wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > The defaults have worked well for us so far. The only extra thing we've > done (besides increasing the heap size) was add: > > -XX:NewRatio=5 > > We found that, with a 6 gig JVM, about 2 gigs of that was going to the > young generation. Setting NewRatio as above pretty much halved that, > giving the other gig back to the old generation pool. For us, this led > to a pretty drastic drop in server load, so I guess we were spending a > fair bit of time doing full GCs (or maybe it was just that scavenging > the young generation was taking longer. Not sure) > > Cheers, > > Mark > > > Wayne Graham <ws...@wm...> writes: > > >> I'm a little tardy, but I just wrote up a short-ish description on >> setting the JAVA_OPTIONS variable for tuning the JVM for Solr in the >> Performance section of the vufind wiki (http://vufind.org/wiki/performance). >> >> Has anyone needed/wanted to tune Jetty yet? Or are the defaults in there >> working ok for folks? >> > > |
From: Naomi D. <nd...@st...> - 2008-06-02 18:11:49
|
Wayne, Thanks for this. We need to tune for facet performance, but I haven't done my homework yet. I don't know if Jetty is part of the issue. - Naomi On May 30, 2008, at 7:37 AM, Wayne Graham wrote: > I'm a little tardy, but I just wrote up a short-ish description on > setting the JAVA_OPTIONS variable for tuning the JVM for Solr in the > Performance section of the vufind wiki (http://vufind.org/wiki/performance > ). > > Has anyone needed/wanted to tune Jetty yet? Or are the defaults in > there > working ok for folks? > > Thanks, > Wayne > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > VuFind-General mailing list > VuF...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vufind-general Naomi Dushay nd...@st... |
From: Wayne G. <ws...@wm...> - 2008-06-03 13:58:22
|
The way I think of it is that UseParallelGC is a throughput collector that uses a parallel version of young generation collection with the tenured collector being the same as the defaults in the JVM. If you want parallel young generation GC with concurrent GC, you use the ParNewGC. I suspect that throughput is more important than concurrent low pauses, so in general, the ParallelGC will be the better choice. Wayne Mark Triggs wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > I think you've pretty much covered our configuration by adding the > NewRatio=5 bit. We're using parallelgc, not parnewgc. I've never been > totally sure of the difference between the two... I had it in my head > that they applied to different generations, but Google's not turning up > much to support that theory :o) > > Thanks, > > Mark > > > Wayne Graham <ws...@wm...> writes: > > >> Mark, >> >> Thanks for this. I was trying not to explain young generation ;) I >> updated the section on garbage collection and added a section on user >> contributed settings. Mind posting yours there? >> >> Also, are you using parallelgc or parnewgc? >> > > |