Hi All, Saw this SOLR-17200 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17200> fixed in 9.6. which seems to be similar to SOLR-17049 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17049>. Could you please take a look and let me know your thoughts?
Thank you, Rajani On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 9:43 AM Vincent Primault <vprima...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote: > Hello, I created a JIRA to track this: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17049 > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:30 PM rajani m <rajinima...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is this an issue in that case? If so, should we create a jira to address > > it? > > > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 8:32 PM Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Yeah, it’s not going to fix that updates can come in too early if you > > just > > > delay when the replica publishes active. It’s still going to show up > > active > > > when it’s not. That gets rectified if you end up replicating the index, > > > it’s when you peer sync that it can be a persistent problem. And in > both > > > cases, you can end up with a window of incorrect queries. > > > > > > The most straightforward way to handle it is to use the cluster state > > > rather than the cores from the core container when publishing down > (where > > > it doesn’t currently use the downnode command) and when waiting to see > > the > > > state. > > > > > >
