Erick,
I was under the misconception that a solr "transaction" is ACID.
>From what you said, I guess solr "transactions" are not Isolated.
Thanks,
Phong
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> See below:
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Phong Dais wrote:
>
> > Erick,
> >
>
See below:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Phong Dais wrote:
> Erick,
>
> My setup is not quite the way you described. I have multiple threads
> indexing simultaneously, but I only have 1 thread doing the commit after
> all
> indexing threads finished. I have multiple instances of this runnin
Erick,
My setup is not quite the way you described. I have multiple threads
indexing simultaneously, but I only have 1 thread doing the commit after all
indexing threads finished. I have multiple instances of this running each
in their own java vm. I'm ok with throwing out all the docs indexed
Sorry, fat fingers. Sent that last e-mail inadvertently.
Anyway, if I have this correct, I'd recommend going to
autocommit and NOT committing from the clients. That's
usually the recommended procedure.
This is especially true if you have a master/slave setup,
because each commit from each client
If your commit from the client fails, you don't really know the
state of your index anyway. All the threads you have sending
documents to Solr are adding them to a single internal buffer.
Committing flushes that buffer.
So if thread 1 gets an error on commit, it will presumably
have some documents
