Aren't you concerned about having a single point of failure with this setup?
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Michael Ryan wrote:
> From a performance point of view, I can't imagine it mattering. In our
> setup, we have a dedicated Solr server that is not a shard that takes
> incoming requests
>From a performance point of view, I can't imagine it mattering. In our setup,
>we have a dedicated Solr server that is not a shard that takes incoming
>requests (we call it the "coordinator"). This server is very lightweight and
>practically has no load at all.
My gut feeling is that having a
On 1/30/2013 6:45 AM, Lee, Peter wrote:
Upayavira,
Thank you for your response. I'm sorry my post is perhaps not clear...I am
relatively new to solr and I'm not sure I'm using the correct nomenclature.
We did encounter the issue of one shard in the stripe going down and all other
shards conti
ught I'd ask
> if anyone has done this already. I was hoping to find a mention of a
> "best practice" somewhere regarding this type of question, but I have not
> found one yet.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Peter S. Lee
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Upayavira [mail
ctice" somewhere regarding this type of question, but I have not found one
yet.
Thanks.
Peter S. Lee
-Original Message-
From: Upayavira [mailto:u...@odoko.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:24 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: A question about attaching shards
I'm afraid I'm note completely clear about your scenario. Let me say how
I understand what you're saying, and what I've done in the past.
Firstly, I take it you are using Solr 3.x (from your reference to a
'shards' parameter.
Secondly, you refer to a 'stripe' as one set of nodes, one for each
sha
