On 10/14/2012 11:16 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
No, that's not what I'm thinking at all. There would be _no_
replication configured. You'd just have two completely independent
installations, one in each of your separate locations. The only
communication path would be that somehow the original docum
I've seen a notion of 'role' in node cloud state. Is it in use or is
> there for future extensions? Having 'indexer' and 'searcher' roles backed by
> the infrastructure would help in certain scenarios I think.
>
> Alexey
>
>
>
>
> --
> V
roles backed by
the infrastructure would help in certain scenarios I think.
Alexey
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SolrCloud-distributed-architecture-considerations-tp4013594p4013616.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
r, the update requests will be also bounced back across the
> network as a part of the online replication process.
>
> Do I miss something fundamental in my assumptions/understanding of SolrCloud
> features?
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Alexey
>
>
>
> --
> View this
across the
network as a part of the online replication process.
Do I miss something fundamental in my assumptions/understanding of SolrCloud
features?
Thanks a lot,
Alexey
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SolrCloud-distributed-architecture-considerations-tp40
Hi,
thanks all, this has been very instructive. It looks like in the short
term using a combination of replication and sharding, based on Upayavira's
setup, might be the safest thing to do, while in the longer term following the
zookeeper integration and solandra development might provid
Hi,
also take a look at solandra:
https://github.com/tjake/Lucandra/tree/solandra
I don't have it in prod yet but regarding administration overhead it
looks very promising.
And you'll get some other neat features like (soft) real time, for free.
So its same like A) + C) + X) - Y) ;-)
Rega
On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 23:11 -0800, "Dennis Gearon"
wrote:
> Wow, would you put a diagram somewhere up on the Solr site?
> Or, here, and I will put it somewhere there.
I'll see what I can do to make a diagram.
> And, what is a VIP?
Virtual IP. It is what a load balancer uses. You assign a 'virtua
27;re hoping to video it, so if
successful, I expect it'll get put online somewhere.
Upayavira
On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 03:44 +, "Jayant Das"
wrote:
>
> Hi, A diagram will be very much appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Jayant
>
> > From: u...@odoko.co.uk
> > To:
0 4:39:40 PM
Subject: Re: distributed architecture
I cannot say how mature the code for B) is, but it is not yet included
in a release.
If you want the ability to distribute content across multiple nodes (due
to volume) and want resilience, then use both.
I've had one setup where we have
Hi, A diagram will be very much appreciated.
Thanks,
Jayant
> From: u...@odoko.co.uk
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: distributed architecture
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 00:39:40 +
>
> I cannot say how mature the code for B) is, but it is not yet inclu
On 11/30/2010 2:27 PM, Cinquini, Luca (3880) wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to know if anybody has suggestions/opinions on what is
currently the best architecture for a distributed search system using Solr. The
use case is that of a system composed
of N indexes, each hosted on a separate machine,
I cannot say how mature the code for B) is, but it is not yet included
in a release.
If you want the ability to distribute content across multiple nodes (due
to volume) and want resilience, then use both.
I've had one setup where we have two master servers, each with four
cores. Then we have two
Hi,
I'd like to know if anybody has suggestions/opinions on what is
currently the best architecture for a distributed search system using Solr. The
use case is that of a system composed
of N indexes, each hosted on a separate machine, each index containing unique
content.
Options that I
4 big indices if those servers can handle them.
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
> From: "Woytowitz, Matthew"
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 1:01:48 PM
> Subject: Distribut
I have 4 servers each with 8 cores and 32 gigs of ram with 2TB of SAN
space for each server. We want to distribute the index across the 4
servers using shards.
What would be better:
4 big indexes. One on each server. 4 total shards, one per server.
X number of smaller indexes, X on
16 matches
Mail list logo
