[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17023628#comment-17023628 ]
ASF subversion and git services commented on SOLR-13101: -------------------------------------------------------- Commit 5c797bfa31063a6532e223a18db16c0a2dc8effe in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/jira/SOLR-13101 from ebehrendt [ https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=5c797bf ] SOLR-13101: Log accurate file counts for Push and Pull in CorePushPull (#1195) * CorePushPull blob interaction log line inaccurate in case of failures. Fix logged file and bytes count to be accurate in both success and failure * Move file transfer count data into inner class to preserve incremented values when exception is thrown > Shared storage support in SolrCloud > ----------------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-13101 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13101 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: SolrCloud > Reporter: Yonik Seeley > Priority: Major > Time Spent: 11h 10m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > Solr should have first-class support for shared storage (blob/object stores > like S3, google cloud storage, etc. and shared filesystems like HDFS, NFS, > etc). > The key component will likely be a new replica type for shared storage. It > would have many of the benefits of the current "pull" replicas (not indexing > on all replicas, all shards identical with no shards getting out-of-sync, > etc), but would have additional benefits: > - Any shard could become leader (the blob store always has the index) > - Better elasticity scaling down > - durability not linked to number of replcias.. a single replica could be > common for write workloads > - could drop to 0 replicas for a shard when not needed (blob store always > has index) > - Allow for higher performance write workloads by skipping the transaction > log > - don't pay for what you don't need > - a commit will be necessary to flush to stable storage (blob store) > - A lot of the complexity and failure modes go away > An additional component a Directory implementation that will work well with > blob stores. We probably want one that treats local disk as a cache since > the latency to remote storage is so large. I think there are still some > "locking" issues to be solved here (ensuring that more than one writer to the > same index won't corrupt it). This should probably be pulled out into a > different JIRA issue. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org