>
>
>
> --- On Mon, 12/20/10, Tri Nguyen wrote:
>
>
> From: Tri Nguyen
> Subject: Re: shard versus core
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Monday, December 20, 2010, 4:04 AM
>
>
> Hi Erick,
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> At whic
help
performance. One thing I've read is my disk should be at least 2 times the
index.
--- On Mon, 12/20/10, Tri Nguyen wrote:
From: Tri Nguyen
Subject: Re: shard versus core
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Date: Monday, December 20, 2010, 4:04 AM
Hi Erick,
Thanks for the explan
Hi Erick,
Thanks for the explanation.
At which point does the index get too big where sharding is appropriate where
it affects performance?
Tri
--- On Sun, 12/19/10, Erick Erickson wrote:
From: Erick Erickson
Subject: Re: shard versus core
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Date: Sunday
On 12/19/2010 2:07 AM, Tri Nguyen wrote:
Was wondering about the pro's and con's of using sharding versus cores.
An index can be split up to multiple cores or multilple shards.
So why one over the other?
If you split your index into multiple cores, you still have to use the
shards parameter
Well, they can be different beasts. First of all, different cores can have
different schemas, which is not true of shards. Also, shards are almost
assumed to be running on different machines as a scaling technique,
whereas it multiple cores are run on a single Solr instance.
So using multiple core
