Your achievements

Level 1

0% to

Level 2

Tip /
Sign in

Sign in to Community

to gain points, level up, and earn exciting badges like the new
Bedrock Mission!

Learn more

View all

Sign in to view all badges

SOLVED

Slow Queries - Issue with Indexing

Krishna_C
Level 4
Level 4

Hi Everyone,

I have created custom lucene  index with the properties interested(most of them are custom properties created in our project) and used used cq:template as well as a property to be indexed. 

Now when I run the query indexing engine is picking up the Default Index for cq:template provided by adobe . 

So whats the priority for indexing ? Cant I use the same property in two indexes ? 

Any help is appreciated . 

Thanks,

Krishna

1 Accepted Solution
Opkar_Gill
Correct answer by
Employee
Employee

Hi Krish,

sorry I just checked and the default cq:template is a property index and not a lucene index. When you run your query, is the performance adequate with the cqtemplate property index? I take it you are searching for pages with a specific cq:template value? 

The cost is calculated for each index and the lowest cost index used.  Using the explain query tool you can see the associated costs.

Regards,

Opkar

View solution in original post

9 Replies
kautuk_sahni
Community Manager
Community Manager

Hi 

Please have a look at this article, i hope this would act as some help to you.

Link:- http://www.techaspect.com/blog/web-content-management/adobe-experience-manager/customizing-the-order...

Thanks and Regards

Kautuk Sahni

Opkar_Gill
Employee
Employee

Hi Krishna,

you should try and see if you can add your properties to existing OOTB indexes. From what I have heard anecdotally, try and avoid having multiple indexes for the same type, in this case you have two cq:template indexes defined. See if it helps and let us know.

Regards,

Opkar

Opkar_Gill
Employee
Employee

kautuksahni wrote...

Hi 

Please have a look at this article, i hope this would act as some help to you.

Link:- http://www.techaspect.com/blog/web-content-management/adobe-experience-manager/customizing-the-order...

Thanks and Regards

Kautuk Sahni

 

Kautuk,

this is an older article and does not apply to Oak index based searching.

Regards,

Opkar

kautuk_sahni
Community Manager
Community Manager

Hi Opkar

Thank you. I will make a not for me.

Thanks and Regards

Kautuk Sahni

Krishna_C
Level 4
Level 4

Hi Opkar,

Thanks for the information. 

I will remove the cq:template in queries and I will try to stick to custom properties , I have added this assuming that it could make my search clean. I still have to check whether I can achieve all mu use cases by removing this.

Thanks,

Krish

Opkar_Gill
Correct answer by
Employee
Employee

Hi Krish,

sorry I just checked and the default cq:template is a property index and not a lucene index. When you run your query, is the performance adequate with the cqtemplate property index? I take it you are searching for pages with a specific cq:template value? 

The cost is calculated for each index and the lowest cost index used.  Using the explain query tool you can see the associated costs.

Regards,

Opkar

View solution in original post

Krishna_C
Level 4
Level 4

Thanks Opkar. 

So the cq:template index is of the lowest cost , then I think I may have to check the indexing. This issue is happening only in one of the environments  and it is taking the correct the index in other environments. I will check the configuration again.

Thanks again 🙂

Krish

sureshy2015
Level 4
Level 4

there is a

evaluatePathRestrictions property which need to be true to pick your index + add included paths property it should be your project specific content path(this will reduce index size of yours than default).this should solve your issue

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
 
Krishna_C
Level 4
Level 4

Thanks Suresh.

I was aware of this but I was hesitant to do a code change to add paths in my queries. In 5.6 path was not indexed so we made sure our queries should not have paths within it for better performance.

As a last options I would add paths in my queries and index as well.

Thanks,

Krishna