Makes sense, thank you, Vincent.

On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 9:45 AM Vincent Primault
<vprima...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> The cause is similar but SOLR-17200 being fixed does not mean that
> SOLR-17049 is. The latter might be a bit trickier to fix.
>
> Vincent
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 3:41 PM Rajani M <rajinima...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to