Query Suggestion Options
Last word completion
Keyboard Layouts
GitHub

👀 While it's loading, feel free to check out the other repositories:

🔔 To get a notification when it's ready, leave your email here:

By entering your email, you agree to receive notifications and marketing-related emails

Filter by reset

9113 results 51 ms in manticoresoftware/manticoresearch

Test/fix replace into

Adjusting the regular expression to calculate performance.

PavelShilin89PavelShilin89 · 2024-10-02 · 1 · #2612

done

Dont Deprecate PHP API

jobs-gitjobs-git · 2019-01-24 · 7 · #135

I would say you should share the specifics of your benchmarks. Maybe there is something that can be tweaked to get better performance. In my own tests (admittedly quite crude) didnt find a appracable difference for most queries. And using mysql client was …

barryhunterbarryhunter · 2018-12-12

Optimize performance of REPLACE INTO SET

Proposal: # manticore-load \ --drop \ --batch-size=1000 \ --threads=5 \ --total=1000000 \ --init="CREATE TABLE test(id bigint, name text, type int)" \ --load="INSERT INTO test(id,name,type) VALUES(<increment>,'<text/10/100>',<int/1/100>)" # rm /tmp/sql; …

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2025-04-25 · 9 · #3234

waitingest::size_S

❓ Per-field tokenization (question for the community) ❓

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-12-28 · 11 · #2006

the mentioned performance reduction would only apply to tables where this feature is used The performance reduction mentioned would likely apply only to tables that utilize this feature. We would do our best to maintain the current level of performance in …

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-03-28

Queries are slow, about 200 million data points.

This is my configuration, version 3.4.2 runs in docker.CPU 2 core, memory 2G. searchd { listen = 9312 listen = 9308:http listen = 9306:mysql41 log = /var/log/manticore/searchd.log query_log = /var/lib/manticore/data/query.log binlog_path = /var/lib/ …

donbing007donbing007 · 2020-07-20 · 16 · #346

waitingwontfix

how to search fast with ramchunk(rt table) in High-Frequency Write Systems

zhangdapao745zhangdapao745 · 2025-01-31 · 18 · #2787

rel::7.0.0

Thanks for preparing the test case @zhangdapao745 @tomatolog please reproduce it, profile and suggest what we could do to improve the performance.

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-12-12

FREEZE vs optimize

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-02-16 · 0 · #1833

Test Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO)

zamazan4ikzamazan4ik · 2023-07-06 · 5 · #1247

I think this is the excellent task for the community to collect PGO statistics for the section about "Performance tuning"…

tomatologtomatolog · 2023-07-06

1👍1

Manticore 2.8 is slow

I forked benchmarks to https://github.com/abhijo89-uc/benchmarks/ and updated from plain index to rt index. then perform the same test . Its really slow !! Any comments ? Google sheet is : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ …

abhijo89-ucabhijo89-uc · 2021-06-29 · 5 · #182

For the same statement, the first query time is always very slow, but the second query time is very fast. Is there a solution?

zhangsanhuozhangsanhuo · 2024-07-02 · 5 · #2349

you could run you queries like set profiling = 1; query; show profile; then upload profile output for both runs to check what took most of time. Thanks for your answer. first time: second time: I tried to look up the definition of "fullscan" and found …

zhangsanhuozhangsanhuo · 2024-07-01

Performance degradation in b632b/709b9

There are several performance degradations in 20230909 b632b 709b9 (compared to 20230624 75a47 35b04 ). One of them is because I limited maximum threads in all fulltext queries to the number of physical cores. My benchmarks show that most of the time …

githubmanticoregithubmanticore · 2023-09-20 · 1 · #1443

est::size_M

how to search fast with ramchunk(rt table) in High-Frequency Write Systems

zhangdapao745zhangdapao745 · 2025-01-31 · 18 · #2787

rel::7.0.0

@zhangdapao745 We discussed your issue in detail during today's call. It seems there might be other ways to improve performance in this case. Could you share a reproducible example with us so we can test and investigate the issue locally?

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-11-28

log optimizing steps

Related to #1103

klirichekklirichek · 2024-09-06 · 0 · #2547

Feature Request: Different Data Formats

AbstractiveNordAbstractiveNord · 2023-06-21 · 5 · #1176

Latency overhead is sharp problem on Percolate Queries tho.

AbstractiveNordAbstractiveNord · 2023-06-21

Test Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO)

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. Not a problem - just an idea of how to (possibly) improve ManticoreSearch performance. Describe the solution you'd like Recently I did a lot of testing Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO) on …

zamazan4ikzamazan4ik · 2023-07-06 · 5 · #1247

CPU optimisation ideas

animetoshoanimetosho · 2025-02-03 · 15 · #2660

waiting

I asked you about the complete cases these we could reproduce and investigate locally. As I do not think that we should optimize low level for 1-3% speed boost code while high level such as secondary indexes instead of the full-scan or wand instead of the …

tomatologtomatolog · 2024-10-18

Implemented performance optimizations for join batching

Implemented performance optimizations for join batching

glookkaglookka · 2025-02-03 · 0 · #3043

6.2.0 gives syntax error, older versions don't

cappadaancappadaan · 2024-05-23 · 33 · #1335

bugest::NO_ESTIMATErel::6.3.0

Try disabling pseudo_sharding, it worked for me. We process a lot of queries per second on a 32 cpu machine and it ended up being faster.

cappadaancappadaan · 2023-09-08

Implement batching inside a join query

Proposal: Currently join works by generating a query to the right table for every match in the left table and storing the result in a cache. If there are a lot of unique join conditions, this is very slow. We could accumulate join conditions for several …

glookkaglookka · 2025-01-23 · 8 · #2909

rel::7.0.0

Upgrading manticore from 6.0.4_230314.1a3a4ea82-1.el8 to 6.2.12_230822.dc5144d35-1.el8 results in significant cpu usage increase

digiravedigirave · 2024-01-24 · 16 · #1563

est::size_S

Here's what you can do for a fair comparison: stop both searchds purge OS cache start them wait some time inspect the load and query stats. For the latter you can calculate avg, 95p and 99p respone time from the query logs. If after that you can still see …

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2023-11-05

Query optimization problems.

I have an index with 200 full text fields in it. I prepared 3.8 million data, but the data is highly repetitive. It takes 250-300 milliseconds on average to run the following query. create table test (e, s0.....s199) rt_mem_limit='1024m' min_prefix_len = …

donbing007donbing007 · 2021-01-22 · 6 · #417

Histograms are slow when estimating large IN(...) filters

glookkaglookka · 2025-02-28 · 2 · #3039

bugrel::7.4.6

Tests: n/a (performance optimization) Docs: n/a (performance optimization)

glookkaglookka · 2025-02-03

What are the factors that affect search efficiency?

Want to consult, have those factors to affect search efficiency. Because I've learned from elasticSearch that an index should not be too much larger than available memory, so response times are millisecond level. Does manticore have the same mechanism? …

donbing007donbing007 · 2020-08-14 · 4 · #376

discussion

JOIN performance issue

glookkaglookka · 2025-02-28 · 2 · #2995

bugrel::7.4.6

Tests: n/a (performance optimization) Docs: n/a (performance optimization)

glookkaglookka · 2025-02-03

how to search fast with ramchunk(rt table) in High-Frequency Write Systems

Confirmation Checklist: You have searched for an answer in the manual. You have considered using the forum for general discussions, which can be more suitable for non-urgent or broad queries. You are aware of our community support channels on Slack, …

zhangdapao745zhangdapao745 · 2025-01-31 · 18 · #2787

rel::7.0.0

how to search fast with ramchunk(rt table) in High-Frequency Write Systems

zhangdapao745zhangdapao745 · 2025-01-31 · 18 · #2787

rel::7.0.0

@sanikolaev Thank you for your reply! We discussed your issue in detail during today's call. It seems there might be other ways to improve performance in this case. Could you share a reproducible example with us so we can test and investigate the issue …

zhangdapao745zhangdapao745 · 2024-11-28

Manticore 4.0.2 slower than Manticore 3.6.3

…Hi, I have a production 3.6.3 installation and I'm evaluating to migrate to 4.0.2, before this upgrade I'm doing some stressing tests to evaluating performances. Here the steps to compare the results: I started a VM Centos 7 with Manticore 3.6.3 …

ivanghisleniivanghisleni · 2021-11-24 · 17 · #650

Slow performance SNIPPETS on agent index

daikozdaikoz · 2025-04-25 · 8 · #568

bugwaiting

For example : SELECT ProductId, HIGHLIGHT(...) FROM MyProductLoadBalancing WHERE MATCH('michelin') LIMIT 0, 20 OPTION max_matches = 400; this previous query is slow. Thus, I replace by 2 queries: first without HIGHLIGHT. I get only 20 productId SELECT …

daikozdaikoz · 2025-04-25

Queries on taxi dataset are slow with ps=1

Queries on partial taxi dataset (6 indexes) are almost 2x slower with pseudo_sharding enabled: mysql> set global pseudo_sharding=0; SELECT avg(total_amount) FROM taxi WHERE trip_distance = 5; show meta; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) …

githubmanticoregithubmanticore · 2023-09-05 · 1 · #1316

bugrel::6.2.0

Is there a way to apply morphology to the data field in CALL PQ?

dubadamdubadam · 2019-04-18 · 16 · #183

bug

I'm going to close this ticket. You might create another ticket to investigate PQ document matching took 10 sec. However please post queries stream as you said about 360k rows its not clear there is some query that cause slow processing or just amount of …

tomatologtomatolog · 2019-04-18

optimize grouping by time further

A query like this is now about 10 times faster than before revamp of the date/time functions, but as discussed there still seems to be room for further optimization: mysql> SELECT year(pickup_datetime) as y, count(*) trips FROM taxi GROUP BY y ORDER BY y …

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-02-07 · 0 · #1797

est::NO_ESTIMATE

Manticore 4.0.2 slower than Manticore 3.6.3

ivanghisleniivanghisleni · 2021-11-24 · 17 · #650

OK, so I assume: batch size: 1 concurrency: 4 protocol: SQL Try much bigger batch size, e.g. 1000. It should increase the performance a lot.

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2021-10-22

Slow SELECT ... JOIN + FACET

select ... join + facet against 2 tables of 277562 and 8671 docs is too slow: snikolaev@dev2:~$ mysql -P9306 -h0 Server version: 6.2.13 8db8be098@24031215 dev (columnar 2.2.5 aa3504b@240304) (secondary 2.2.5 aa3504b@240304) (knn 2.2.5 aa3504b@240304) git …

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2024-03-19 · 2 · #1950

est::size_Mfeature::join

ZONESPAN speed implications

andrisiandrisi · 2022-03-29 · 3 · #737

@tomatolog and is there a known approximate % added to the processing time? For some other features it's noted. In the a I've case the slowdown is significant, like 100x - so something is probably wrong. Using the Paragraph operator with the same dataset …

andrisiandrisi · 2022-03-28

performance degradation with wildcard queries with many matches when disk_chunks > 1

Bug Description: There is a noticeable decrease in the speed of executing wildcard queries with an index using two or more disk chunks compared to the speed of executing the same queries with the same data using one disk chunk. This issue was not observed …

AlexeyRemenyakAlexeyRemenyak · 2024-07-31 · 12 · #2280

bugrel::6.3.4

agent_retry_count does not work with ha_strategy nodeads and noerrors

airolgairolg · 2017-10-19 · 3 · #9

Any chance to look into the CPU usage in this case? 30% system time just to pass around data seems way too much. Should I open another issue?

razvanphprazvanphp · 2017-10-19

Is it possible to limit the memory usage of the searchd process

I find that after batch insert data to manticore, the usage of the searchd process not free the memory? This is my config file index hacker_new { type = rt rt_mem_limit = 2048M path = /home/mcsearch/index/hacker_new rt_attr_bigint = story_id rt_attr_ …

sangensongsangensong · 2021-04-23 · 4 · #538

waiting

FATAL: out of memory

donbing007donbing007 · 2020-07-02 · 35 · #361

bugwaiting

I just want to be sure that I reproduced the same issue as you have and you got a lot of RAM segments for index what got slow

tomatologtomatolog · 2020-06-29

fuzzy=1 extremely slow on OR query

Bug Description: Using fuzzy=1 this OR query is extremely slow. this is a basic query. If I add all select+where fields the query runs at least 20+seconds with fuzzy=1 and without in 50ms! SELECT field FROM index WHERE MATCH('php | (^php$)') 16ms SELECT …

cappadaancappadaan · 2025-05-02 · 18 · #3274

bugwaiting

Optimize performance of REPLACE INTO SET

sanikolaevsanikolaev · 2025-04-25 · 9 · #3234

waitingest::size_S

I’m seeing even worse results... (9.2.16 a8fc1a6ab@25040101 dev | buddy v3.27.1+25033114-da59a70c-dev) 🧪 Test Results Non-Buddy REPLACE (no SELECTs): mysql -h0 -P9306 -e "truncate table test_replce_perf;" rm /tmp/sql for n in `seq 1 5000`; do echo " …

djklim87djklim87 · 2025-04-08