![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
#691
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Originally Posted by UK Jimbo
Here is the command line I use (within cron):![]()
I just ran it with this output:
It's frustrating because it is an intermittent error--I kept trying to reproduce it but had no luck. The output looks OK. But, it's updating the threaddelta.new.* files, not the threaddelta.* files (which remain at zero bytes, dated 5/29/09). It's not a huge deal, since I can dump and regenerate all the indexes, but I just don't want this to happen if we put this on our "production" forum, and was curious to know how it happened.
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#692
|
||||
|
||||
Those .new files relate to the --rotate option and the indexer read more about it here: http://sphinxsearch.com/docs/current.html#ref-indexer
I would suspect that something preventing the indexer from rotating the files out perhaps the file permissions? I'd suggest deleting all of the threaddelta files and then re-indexing.
__________________
administrator: visordown.com No members have liked this post.
|
#693
|
||||
|
||||
Originally Posted by UK Jimbo
That was what I suspected--something like a temporary file, IOW.![]()
Originally Posted by UK Jimbo
Nothing has changed on the server, so I'd attribute it to some kind of glitch in one (or all?) of those files dating back to May. Permissions and ownership matches all the others in the same directory, which was the first thing I checked. ![]()
I just tried deleting the threaddelta files, and reran the command line: /usr/home/shtv/sphinx/bin/indexer --config /usr/home/shtv/sphinx/bin/sphinx_rr.conf threaddelta This created a new set of threaddelta.* files. OK, so far so good. But then I go and retry with the --rotate option, and we're back to having the .new.* files, and the threaddelta.* files don't get updated. In the same directory, the post.* and postmeta.* files are all working properly. Deeply weird...I could see if I had changed the configuration of this mess awhile ago, but I actually haven't touched it since July last year, when I first installed it. No other changes on the server, and we have plenty of disk space. Still poring over the Sphinx docs you pointed to...but am not seeing much else helpful yet. Thanks!
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#694
|
||||
|
||||
have you tried restarting searchd and then trying it all over again?
Sounds like a strange one. Perhaps worth posting on the forum over at sphinxsearch.com
__________________
administrator: visordown.com No members have liked this post.
|
#695
|
||||
|
||||
I'm willing to try anything. Although, the problem is with the indexer...unless something in searchd is somehow preventing the files from rotating properly (maybe searchd reporting that it's "busy", in other words, so the .new.* files don't get rotated in).
Originally Posted by UK Jimbo
I'll do a search over there--thanks! I'll probably try dumping the entire index, regenerating a new one, restart searchd, etc., and start with a clean slate before pestering them too much over there. ![]()
![]()
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#696
|
||||
|
||||
Originally Posted by RedWingFan
In my mind it's 50:50 whether it's the indexer or searchd which is causing the problem. The indexer seems to be creating the index happily with the .new file name. After that it's the job of the search daemon to rotate the new index in.![]()
With some of those .new files there what happens if you signal a restart to searchd with (not tested but I think this is correct).
That's the same method that the indexer uses to signal a rotate to searchd. I can't remember if searchd keeps a system log of it's activity. if so the restarts (and any possible problems) might be reported. Good luck!
__________________
administrator: visordown.com No members have liked this post.
|
#697
|
||||
|
||||
I did:
...to stop, then restarted searchd. First time I ran the indexer, the .new.* files all were deleted. One hour and about 20 rotations later, they're still gone. Thanks much--it worked!
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#698
|
||||
|
||||
Afraid I've not trawled the whole thread for this but here's a product that makes the install of the two small plugins even easier. Use at your own risk, etc...
__________________
administrator: visordown.com No members have liked this post.
|
#699
|
||||
|
||||
Originally Posted by UK Jimbo
Thanks! I'll try it out and let you know how it works. I'm about to pull the plug on fulltext and try Sphinx on our main (production) forum. Can't live w/o InnoDB tables, as I'm finding. I'll report back here, good or bad. ![]()
![]() The hardest part is trying to remember what I did to get Sphinx running on our test forum. Working my way through the posts here, and my own notes...I think I'm getting it. ![]()
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#700
|
||||
|
||||
Originally Posted by RedWingFan
I'd recommend (this is true of any production roll-out):![]()
__________________
administrator: visordown.com No members have liked this post.
|
#701
|
||||
|
||||
I have it running OK now.
Really basic (OK, stupid ![]()
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#702
|
|||
|
|||
Originally Posted by RedWingFan
No.![]()
First set the search type back to fulltext. This will tell VB not to populate the search tables (word and another one). The onus of maintaining search data now shifts to MySQL. Then drop the fulltext indices from post and thread tables.
__________________
eXBii.com - Indian community
no XB no fun know XB know fun ! No members have liked this post.
|
#703
|
||||
|
||||
I'll give that a try, thanks! My post and thread tables are converted to InnoDB, so they can't accept fulltext anyway.
Will doing this generate any kind of error, either from MySQL or vB? I don't think it will, but our visitors have a way of shaking out any type of rare bug or hiccup, when I least expect it. ![]()
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
#704
|
|||
|
|||
If your tables are innodb, there will certainly be an error when you try to set search back to fulltext.
__________________
eXBii.com - Indian community
no XB no fun know XB know fun ! No members have liked this post.
|
#705
|
||||
|
||||
Just looked at this again: if I try to change it back to fulltext, it will attempt to change the InnoDB tables back to MyISAM. Don't want that!
In the settings table, "fulltextsearch" has its "value" column set to "0". There are other parameters in that row. Think I'm safe to change "value" to "1" (and rebuild the datastore cache)? I just have to comment that since changing tables back to InnoDB and implementing Sphinx, our forum runs SO much better now! I had fulltext previously. Searching for "Steve" as a search word, it would take 35-40 seconds to get results. (Steve is our forum's owner, so his name appears in most threads.) With Sphinx, the searches come back on average around 0.4 seconds. And with the InnoDB change, we don't have stacks of queries waiting in the queue anymore. The only hiccup I've had is that I once again had a set of *.new.* files, this time for my post indexes. I killed and restarted searchd, and reran the update, and it all rotated properly. My clue was a forum member saying he couldn't search for his posts for the past few days. Sure enough, the stale indexes were dated around the time he was unable to find his posts. I may have to run a cron job to check for any *.new.* files in that directory, and possibly put together a shell script to kill and restart searchd.
__________________
-= N =- No members have liked this post.
|
![]() |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|
New To Site? | Need Help? |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:06.