Looks much like what I'm encountering. Guessing that will go away once I
update solr, just wanted to make sure it wasn't a real bug. Entirely
possible we are getting some "empty commits" given the nature of the index
maintenance. Thanks for the pointer!
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Chris H
Having a strange intermittent issue with my 1 master, 3 slave solr 4.2
setup. On occasion, after indexing the master and replicating across the
three slaves, each slave will start reporting they are one generation ahead
(525 vs. 524 on the master) and thus out of sync. Replication runs appear
to
something I can balance out
better...
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Raymond Wiker wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2013, at 17:36 , Neal Ensor wrote:
> > So, I have an oddball question I have been battling with in the last day
> or
> > two.
> >
> > I have an 8 million
n off highlighting, etc., but these seem
to be out of the question. I would at least like some concrete reason why
one filter query would be so relatively out of whack than the other, given
the document ranges are very nearly half (3.8 million vs. 4.0 million in
the slower side).
Any pointers or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Neal Ensor
nen...@gmail.com
I'll give that a shot, thanks!
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 7/3/2013 9:29 AM, Neal Ensor wrote:
>
>> Posted the solr config up as http://apaste.info/4eKC (hope that works).
>> Note that this is largely a hold-over from upgrades of previous
ample
configuration.
I will take up the logging portions you listed there, to see where I might
have missed a library or configuration point, thanks.
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 7/1/2013 1:07 PM, Neal Ensor wrote:
>
>> is it conceivable that there's too much
Jun 27, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
> Odd - looks like it's stuck waiting to be notified that a new searcher is
> ready.
>
> - Mark
>
> On Jun 27, 2013, at 8:58 AM, Neal Ensor wrote:
>
> > Okay, I have done this (updated to 4.3.1 across master and fo
1 or later (4.3.1 is the latest release).
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Neal Ensor wrote:
> > As a bit of background, we run a setup (coming from 3.6.1 to 4.2
> relatively
> > recently) with a single master receiving updates with three slaves
> pulling
> > cha
itionally, I didn't really see the expected performance boost, but
that's a separate issue entirely).
Any ideas? Any configuration details I might share/reconfigure? Any
suggestions are appreciated. I could also upgrade to the later 4.3+
versions, if that might help.
Thanks!
Neal Ensor
nen...@gmail.com
gs worse, I have set up a new "slave" on my work PC (Mac),
and it replicates FLAWLESSLY on the same set up; only difference is
the slaves on the servers are on a SAN array (not sure if locking is
causing the heartburn?) Any pointers would be great. This is
obviously becoming a pain to wo
haps we should change the requests in favor of
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4311 to avoid any caching at the
> UI? Results maybe in a few more (real) requests but i guess that would be
> okay?
>
> Stefan
>
>
> On Monday, March 4, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Neal Ensor wro
Actually, just updated Chrome this morning, and it all appears to
work. Flushed cache as well, so could be part of that. All's well
that ends well I suppose.
neal
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Jens Grivolla wrote:
> On 03/01/2013 07:46 PM, Neal Ensor wrote:
>>
>> Again
t; 2) And what is/are the Name of your core(s)?
> 3) When you're talking about the "old" core admin, what is the url you're
> trying to access?
>
> Perhaps you can as well provide Screenshots of the Core-Admin and the
> Drop-Down (left side in the Navigation) whi
as a container, freshly-built
solr-4.2-SNAPSHOT.war hot off the compiler.
Neal Ensor
nen...@gmail.com
;d like to not
have to "special case" it if possible. Any pointers would be great
(even if its to point me at Tomcat's mailing list. :) )
Thanks!
Neal Ensor
nen...@gmail.com
15 matches
Mail list logo
