It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Is there a guide indicating what's a complex query for RRC to run and what's not?

Taly Hotimsky (2714657) | asked Aug 07 '14, 3:21 p.m.
I'm on RRC 4.0.6 and trying to run a query against my artifacts.

My criteria are:
Tags not all of <4 different tags out of a total of 32 tags we use>
Type <1 type out of a total of 16 types we use>

My columns are:
Primary Text
Link From

This should return around 30 artifacts out of around 450 total.

However, every time I try to run it, I get an error indicating it took to long and the search is not completed.

It doesn't look to me like it's that complex a query that should yield that error, but I have hard time judging if the issue is on my server architecture/set up or if it's a problem with RRC itself.

Is there some sort of documentation indicating what are the limitations or not-recommended combinations to run queries for artifacts?

Donald Nong commented Aug 08 '14, 12:03 a.m.

This does not sound right if the total number of 450 is for the entire RRC system (not just the particular project area). Such a query should return the result within a second. If your RRC system has much more artifacts than that, you may get a performance issue and you need to do some tuning.

Taly Hotimsky commented Aug 08 '14, 9:14 a.m.

That's for the particular PA only.
There are many more PAs in the same server (I don't know how many artifacts total) 

Accepted answer

permanent link
Stef van Dijk (2.0k179) | answered Aug 07 '14, 11:12 p.m.
I'm not aware of any documentation along the lines of what you're looking for. That said, there are some known issues with the performance of certain view queries which could be impacting you.

These work items are potential candidates:
Certain view queries with sophisticated link patterns / parameters poorly perform (86748)
Query to determine whether resource has OSLC link is poor performing  (89899)
Taly Hotimsky selected this answer as the correct answer

Taly Hotimsky commented Aug 08 '14, 9:16 a.m.

Both WIs seem to have been fixed as part of 5.0 efforts. I'll wait until we can get the server updated to try and run the same query again to be able to compare performance and assess whether the server architecture requires changes or not.


(I still think there should be official documentation on this to help projects make that assessment) 

2 other answers

permanent link
Paul Ellis (1.3k613) | answered Aug 08 '14, 9:18 a.m.
I'd be interested to know if this is actually a defect fixed in 5.0.1:

You can set "Maximum number of terms that a field in a Lucene document can contain" to -1 in the Advanced Properties of the JTS Admin interface.

Comment 3 also states the errors in the log you might be experiencing.  I see you've accepted Stef's answer already, but if you are able to check this, that'd be great.

Stef van Dijk commented Aug 08 '14, 9:37 a.m.

Paul, that work item appears to be related to Lucene. That would only affect text-based searches and not the sort of view filter/query described by Taly.

permanent link
Erwin Kunz (94687086) | answered Aug 11 '14, 11:12 a.m.

We also had  the same issue with 4.0.3 and still have it with 4.0.7

Some of the Views (query) could be fixed by chnging the timeout which is way to small for the kind of query you have

Your answer

Register or to post your answer.

Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.