2020, at 2:54 AM, Jan Høydahl wrote:
>>
>> The API that enables master/slave is the ReplicationHandler, where the
>> follower (slave) pulls index files from leader (master).
>> This same API is used in SolrCloud for the PULL replica type, and also as a
>> fallback for ful
t 2:54 AM, Jan Høydahl wrote:
>
> The API that enables master/slave is the ReplicationHandler, where the
> follower (slave) pulls index files from leader (master).
> This same API is used in SolrCloud for the PULL replica type, and also as a
> fallback for full recovery if tran
The API that enables master/slave is the ReplicationHandler, where the follower
(slave) pulls index files from leader (master).
This same API is used in SolrCloud for the PULL replica type, and also as a
fallback for full recovery if transaction log is not enough.
So I don’t see it going away
> it better not ever be depreciated. it has been the most reliable mechanism
> for its purpose
I would like to know whether that is the consensus of Solr developers.
We had been scrambling to move from Master/Slave to CDCR based on the assertion
that CDCR support would last far longe
d, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:58 PM Oakley, Craig (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]
> wrote:
>
>> Based on the thread below (reading "legacy" as meaning "likely to be
>> deprecated in later versions"), we have been working to extract ourselves
>> from Master/Slave replication
>
>whether we should expect Master/Slave replication also to be deprecated
it better not ever be depreciated. it has been the most reliable mechanism
for its purpose, solr cloud isnt going to replace standalone, if it does,
thats when I guess I stop upgrading or move to elastic
On Wed, Sep
Based on the thread below (reading "legacy" as meaning "likely to be deprecated
in later versions"), we have been working to extract ourselves from
Master/Slave replication
Most of our collections need to be in two data centers (a read/write copy in
one local data center: t
e.org
Subject: Re: Getting rid of Master/Slave nomenclature in Solr
Here is some of the work I did to remedy this effort before I knew about this
email:
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1712
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14702page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabp
s me sick to read master/slave and this issue has alienated a buddy I've
tried to recruit to volunteer on the project. All comments welcome, but please
read the above docs as I will review this email thread now to understand what
has already been discussed. I put in a lot of work to get t
On 28/06/2020 14:42, Erick Erickson wrote:
> We need to draw a sharp distinction between standalone “going away”
> in terms of our internal code and going away in terms of the user
> experience.
It'll be hard to make it completely transparant in terms of user
experience. For instance, tere is curr
Wandering off topic, but still apropos Solr.
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 12:14:56PM +0200, Ilan Ginzburg wrote:
> I disagree Ishan. We shouldn't get rid of standalone mode.
> I see three layers in Solr:
>
>1. Lucene (the actual search libraries)
>2. The server infra ("standalone Solr" basical
@uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm following this thread now for a while and I can understand
>>>>>>> the wish to change some naming/wording/speech in one or the other
>>>>>>> programs but I alw
>>> programs but I always get back to the one question:
>>>>>> "Is it the weapon which kills people or the hand controlled by
>>>>>> the mind which fires the weapon?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The thread started with slav
er to master
>> > > > and followed by leader (for me as a german... you know).
>> > > > What will come next?
>> > > >
>> > > > And more over, we now discuss about changes in the source code and
>> > > > due to this there need t
mentation.
> > > > What about the books people wrote about this programs and source
> code,
> > > > should we force this authors to rewrite their books?
> > > > May be we should file a request to all web search engines to reject
> > > > all stored content about these "banned" words?
> > > > And contact all web hosters about providing bad content.
> > > >
> > > > To sum things up, within my 40 years of computer science and writing
> > > > programs I have never had a nanosecond any thoughts about words
> > > > like master, slave, leader, ... other than thinking about computers
> > > > and programming.
> > > >
> > > > Just my 2 cents.
> > > >
> > > > For what it is worth, I tend to guide/follower if there "must be" any
> > > > changes.
> > > >
> > > > Bernd
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
entation.
> > > What about the books people wrote about this programs and source code,
> > > should we force this authors to rewrite their books?
> > > May be we should file a request to all web search engines to reject
> > > all stored content about these "
> > And contact all web hosters about providing bad content.
> >
> > To sum things up, within my 40 years of computer science and writing
> > programs I have never had a nanosecond any thoughts about words
> > like master, slave, leader, ... other than thinking about computers
> > and programming.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents.
> >
> > For what it is worth, I tend to guide/follower if there "must be" any
> > changes.
> >
> > Bernd
> >
>
eir books?
> May be we should file a request to all web search engines to reject
> all stored content about these "banned" words?
> And contact all web hosters about providing bad content.
>
> To sum things up, within my 40 years of computer science and writing
> program
020, at 15:19, Mark H. Wood wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:45:25PM +0200, Jan Høydahl wrote:
>> Master/slave and standalone are used interchangably to mean zk-less Solr. I
>> have a feeling that master/slave is the more popular of the two, but
>> personally I have
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:45:25PM +0200, Jan Høydahl wrote:
> Master/slave and standalone are used interchangably to mean zk-less Solr. I
> have a feeling that master/slave is the more popular of the two, but
> personally I have been using both.
I've been trying to stay quiet a
ese "banned" words?
> And contact all web hosters about providing bad content.
>
> To sum things up, within my 40 years of computer science and writing
> programs I have never had a nanosecond any thoughts about words
> like master, slave, leader, ... other than thinking about
n my 40 years of computer science and writing
programs I have never had a nanosecond any thoughts about words
like master, slave, leader, ... other than thinking about computers
and programming.
Just my 2 cents.
For what it is worth, I tend to guide/follower if there "must be" any changes.
Bernd
Master/slave and standalone are used interchangably to mean zk-less Solr. I
have a feeling that master/slave is the more popular of the two, but personally
I have been using both.
Jan
> 24. jun. 2020 kl. 06:34 skrev Noble Paul :
>
> Do we even call it the master/slave mode? I thought
Distributer/Fetcher?
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 10:04, Noble Paul wrote:
> Do we even call it the master/slave mode? I thought we had 2 modes
>
> * Standalone mode
> * SolrCloud mode
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:00 AM Tomás Fernández Löbbe
> wrote:
> >
> > I ag
Do we even call it the master/slave mode? I thought we had 2 modes
* Standalone mode
* SolrCloud mode
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:00 AM Tomás Fernández Löbbe
wrote:
>
> I agree in general with what Trey and Jan said and have suggested. I
> personally like to use "leader/follower&qu
f the architecture needs to be renamed. We tend to refer to
"SolrCloud mode" and "Master/Slave mode", the main part in all this (IMO)
is to change that "mode" name. I kind of like Trey's suggestion of "Managed
Clustering" vs. "Manual Clustering" Mo
> On Jun 19, 2020, at 7:48 AM, Phill Campbell
> wrote:
>
> Delegator - Handler
>
> A common pattern we are all aware of. Pretty simple.
The Solr master does not delegate and the slave does not handle.
The master is a server that handles replication requests from the
slave.
Delegator/handler i
following is just me recapping the conversation that has
> happened so far.
>
> Some members of the community have been discussing getting rid of the
> master/slave nomenclature from Solr.
>
> While this may require a non-trivial effort, a general consensus so far
> seems to be to s
Might be confusing with the nested doc terminology
> Am 19.06.2020 um 20:14 schrieb Atita Arora :
>
> I see so many topics being discussed in this thread and I literary got lost
> somewhere , but was just thinking can we call it Parent -Child
> architecture, m sure no one will raise an objectio
I see so many topics being discussed in this thread and I literary got lost
somewhere , but was just thinking can we call it Parent -Child
architecture, m sure no one will raise an objection there.
Although, looking at comments above I still feel it would be a bigger
effort to convince everyone th
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:22:49AM -0400, j.s. wrote:
> On 6/18/20 9:50 PM, Rahul Goswami wrote:
> > So +1 on "slave" being the problematic term IMO, not "master".
>
> but you cannot have a master without a slave, n'est-ce pas?
Well, yes. In education: Master of Science, Arts, etc. In law:
Spe
The entire idea of removing a word out of our language is problematic.
There will have to be a lot of history books that detail the terrible
conditions of peoples over recorded history changed, or removed.
I find the “F” word extremely offensive. I find references to Deity while
cursing extremel
+1 to Jan's "clustered" vs "non clustered".
If we clean up terminology, I suggest we also clarify the meaning and use
of Slice vs Shard vs Leader vs Replica vs Core. Here's my understanding:
I consider Slice == Shard (and would happily drop Slice): a logical concept
of a specific subset of a coll
hi
solr is very helpful.
On 6/18/20 9:50 PM, Rahul Goswami wrote:
So +1 on "slave" being the problematic term IMO, not "master".
but you cannot have a master without a slave, n'est-ce pas?
i think it is better to use the metaphor of copying rather than one of
hierarchy. language has so many
the first MySql crashes, the cron
script would start failing and it would not recover, until you manually decide
in your APP that the «replica» is to become «leader». Solr Master/Slave is the
same, nothing is really clustered from the application’s point of view.
So perhaps just
Alt G: "
Another alternative for master-slave nodes might be parent-child nodes.
This was adopted in Python too afaik.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 2:07 AM gnandre wrote:
> What about blacklist and whitelist for shards? May I suggest blocklist and
> safelist?
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 1:45 AM Tho
t; On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:19 PM Phill Campbell
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Master - Worker
> > >> Master - Peon
> > >> Master - Helper
> > >> Master - Servant
> > >>
> > >> The term that is not wanted is “slave’. The te
8:19 PM Phill Campbell
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Master - Worker
> >> Master - Peon
> >> Master - Helper
> >> Master - Servant
> >>
> >> The term that is not wanted is “slave’. The term “master” is not a
> problem
> >> IMO.
> >>
&
icial to broaden the range of candidates.
From: Walter Underwood
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 10:34 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Getting rid of Master/Slave nomenclature in Solr
We don’t get to decide whether “master” is a problem. The rest of the world
has already de
whatever state was broken, but it was pretty much turning it off and on again.
That kind of thing just cannot happen with master/slave.
Not sure about “manual”. We do a lot more manual management of our Solr
Cloud clusters. Scaling out the master/slave cluster is stupid simple. Bring
up a clone of a
e people have been calling it
"master/slave" mode in lieu of a more descriptive alternative. I think a
new name (other than "standalone" or "legacy") would be superb.
We have also discussed replacing SolrCloud (which is a terrible name) with
> something more descripti
ell
> wrote:
>
>> Master - Worker
>> Master - Peon
>> Master - Helper
>> Master - Servant
>>
>> The term that is not wanted is “slave’. The term “master” is not a problem
>> IMO.
>>
>>> On Jun 18, 2020, at 3:59 PM, Jan Høydahl wrot
ant
>
> The term that is not wanted is “slave’. The term “master” is not a problem
> IMO.
>
> > On Jun 18, 2020, at 3:59 PM, Jan Høydahl wrote:
> >
> > I support Mike Drob and Trey Grainger. We shuold re-use the
> leader/replica
> > terminology from Cloud. Ev
inology from Cloud. Even if you hand-configure a master/slave cluster
> and orchestrate what doc goes to which node/shard, and hand-code your shards
> parameter, you will still have a cluster where you’d send updates to the
> leader of
> each shard and the replicas would replicate t
I support Mike Drob and Trey Grainger. We shuold re-use the leader/replica
terminology from Cloud. Even if you hand-configure a master/slave cluster
and orchestrate what doc goes to which node/shard, and hand-code your shards
parameter, you will still have a cluster where you’d send updates to the
First off: Forgive me if my comments/questions are redundent or uninformed
bsaed o nthe larger discussion taking place. I have not
caught up on the whole thread before replying -- but that's solely based
on a lack of time on my part, not a lack of willingness to embrace this
change.
>From
Actually, the term “master” is a problem, so master/follower doesn’t work.
GitLab is renaming the master branch to main.
Rice University renamed College Masters to College Magisters in 2017.
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
> On Jun 18, 20
Jun 18, 2020 at 8:48 AM Jason Gerlowski
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to rename master/slave, and +1 to choosing terminology distinct
> > from what's used for SolrCloud. I could be happy with several of the
> > proposed options. Since a good few have been proposed though, maybe
&g
While on the topic of renaming roles, I'd like to propose finding a better
term than "overseer" which has historical slavery connotations as well.
Director, perhaps?
John Gallagher
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 8:48 AM Jason Gerlowski
wrote:
> +1 to rename master/slave,
Primary / satellite?
--
Mark H. Wood
Lead Technology Analyst
University Library
Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis
755 W. Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
317-274-0749
www.ulib.iupui.edu
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
+1 to rename master/slave, and +1 to choosing terminology distinct
from what's used for SolrCloud. I could be happy with several of the
proposed options. Since a good few have been proposed though, maybe
an eventual vote thread is the most organized way to aggregate the
opinions here.
I&#
s at different points in time.
- Demian
-Original Message-
From: Noble Paul
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 1:51 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Getting rid of Master/Slave nomenclature in Solr
Looking at the code I see a 692 occurrences of the word "slave&
+1 Noble and Ilan !!
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 7:51 AM Noble Paul wrote:
> Looking at the code I see a 692 occurrences of the word "slave".
> Mostly variable names and ref guide docs.
>
> The word "slave" is present in the responses as well. Any change in
> the request param/response payload is
Looking at the code I see a 692 occurrences of the word "slave".
Mostly variable names and ref guide docs.
The word "slave" is present in the responses as well. Any change in
the request param/response payload is backward incompatible.
I have no objection to changing the names in ref guide and ot
Would master/follower work?
Half the rename work while still getting rid of the slavery connotation...
On Thu 18 Jun 2020 at 07:13, Walter Underwood wrote:
> > On Jun 17, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> >
> > It has been interesting watching this discussion play out on multiple
> open
> On Jun 17, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
>
> It has been interesting watching this discussion play out on multiple open
> source mailing lists. On other projects, I have seen a VERY high level of
> resistance to these changes, which I find disturbing and surprising.
Yes, it is nice
Master/slave is not going away in our company. That cluster has zero downtime
in five years. I can’t say that about our Solr Cloud clusters.
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
> On Jun 17, 2020, at 9:36 PM, Noble Paul wrote:
>
> I
I really do not see a reason why a master/slave terminology is a problem.
We do not have slavery anywhere in the world. Should we also remove it from
the dictionary?
The old mode is going to go away anyway. Why waste time bikeshedding on
this?
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020, 12:04 PM Trey Grainger wrote
e both just pull the index from the leader/master and as
opposed to updates being pushed the other way. As such, I don't see a
meaningful distinction between master/slave and leader/follower behavior in
non-SolrCloud mode vs. SolrCloud mode for the specific functionality we're
talking about rena
become leader. If that happens, then it
> functions exactly like an NRT leader.
>
> I'm aware that saying the following is bikeshedding ... but I do think
> it would be as mistake to use any existing SolrCloud terminology for
> non-cloud deployments, including the word &quo
ld be as mistake to use any existing SolrCloud terminology for
non-cloud deployments, including the word "replica". The top contenders
I have seen to replace master/slave in Solr are primary/secondary and
publisher/subscriber.
It has been interesting watching this discussion play out
ld be as mistake to use any existing SolrCloud terminology for
non-cloud deployments, including the word "replica". The top contenders
I have seen to replace master/slave in Solr are primary/secondary and
publisher/subscriber.
It has been interesting watching this discussion play
Master/slave is not just two roles, but a kind of cluster. I really don’t think
“Standalone” captures the non-Cloud cluster. Nobody in Chegg would
have any idea that “standalone” meant “no Zookeeper”.
I’ve never thought that master/slave accurately described the traditional
replication model
gt;
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I strongly disagree with using the Solr Cloud leader/follower
>> terminology
>> >> for non-Cloud clusters. People in my company are confused enough
>> without
>> >> using polysemous terminology.
>> >>
but it means something different than the
> leader
> >> in this other cluster.” I’m dreading that conversation.
> >>
> >> I like “principal”. How about “clone” for the slave role? That suggests
> >> that
> >> it does not accept updates and that i
+1 for simplifying and using the Leader/Follower Terminology. Our company
operates both SolrCloud, Standalone Solr, and Master/Slave Configurations,
outside of the Solr Developer community, it's painful and confusing to talk
about Master/Slave and Leader/Replica. It would be easier if we ha
> it does not accept updates and that it is loosely-coupled, only depending
>> on the state of the no-longer-called-master.
>>
>> Chegg has five production Solr Cloud clusters and one production
>> master/slave
>> cluster, so this is not a hypothetical for us. We have 10
e? That suggests
> > > that
> > > it does not accept updates and that it is loosely-coupled, only
> depending
> > > on the state of the no-longer-called-master.
> > >
> > > Chegg has five production Solr Cloud clusters and one production
> > > m
coupled, only depending
> on the state of the no-longer-called-master.
>
> Chegg has five production Solr Cloud clusters and one production
> master/slave
> cluster, so this is not a hypothetical for us. We have 100+ Solr hosts in
> production.
>
> wunder
> Walter Underwood
&g
. How about “clone” for the slave role? That suggests
> > that
> > it does not accept updates and that it is loosely-coupled, only depending
> > on the state of the no-longer-called-master.
> >
> > Chegg has five production Solr Cloud clusters and one production
> >
. How about “clone” for the slave role? That suggests
> that
> it does not accept updates and that it is loosely-coupled, only depending
> on the state of the no-longer-called-master.
>
> Chegg has five production Solr Cloud clusters and one production
> master/slave
> cluster,
conversation.
I like “principal”. How about “clone” for the slave role? That suggests that
it does not accept updates and that it is loosely-coupled, only depending
on the state of the no-longer-called-master.
Chegg has five production Solr Cloud clusters and one production master/slave
cluster, so
eader/Follower
usage while also being able to easily accomodate a rename of the historical
master/slave terminology without mental gymnastics or the introduction or
more cognitive load through new terminology. I think adopting the
Primary/Replica terminology will be incredibly confusing given the alr
Hi everyone,
Moving a conversation that was happening on the PMC list to the public
forum. Most of the following is just me recapping the conversation that has
happened so far.
Some members of the community have been discussing getting rid of the
master/slave nomenclature from Solr.
While this
I’ve long thought that master/slave was not the right metaphor for a pull model
anyway.
We probably should not use “replica” since that already has a use in Solr Cloud.
Where is the discussion?
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
> On
+1 to name change. Also 'overseer' which doesn't go well with Master/Slave!
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:16 AM David Smiley
wrote:
> priv...@lucene.apache.org but it should have been public and expect it to
> spill out to the dev list today.
>
> ~ David
>
>
> O
; but
> > incremental.
> > Also, if you want to lend a helping hand, patches are more than welcome
> as
> > always.
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > > 17. jun. 2020 kl. 04:22 skrev Kayak28 :
> > >
> > > Hello, Community:
> > >
> > &g
gt; > As the Github and Python will replace terminologies that relative to
> > slavery,
> > why don't we replace master-slave for Solr as well?
> >
> > https://developers.srad.jp/story/18/09/14/0935201/
> >
> https://developer-tech.com/news/2020/jun/15/githu
k28 :
>
> Hello, Community:
>
> As the Github and Python will replace terminologies that relative to
> slavery,
> why don't we replace master-slave for Solr as well?
>
> https://developers.srad.jp/story/18/09/14/0935201/
> https://developer-tech.com/news/2020/jun/15/
Hello, Community:
As the Github and Python will replace terminologies that relative to
slavery,
why don't we replace master-slave for Solr as well?
https://developers.srad.jp/story/18/09/14/0935201/
https://developer-tech.com/news/2020/jun/15/github-replace-slavery-terms-master-whit
Thanks Eric. Moving to SolrCloud for splitting is what I too imagined 😐
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 1:28 PM Erick Erickson
wrote:
> In a word, “no”. It’s a whole ’nother architecture to deal
> with shards, and stand-alone (i.e. master/slave) has no
> concept of that.
>
> You coul
In a word, “no”. It’s a whole ’nother architecture to deal
with shards, and stand-alone (i.e. master/slave) has no
concept of that.
You could make a single-shard collection in SolrCloud,
copy the index to the right place (I’d shut down Solr while
I copied it), and then use SPLITSHARD on it, but
Hi,
Does Solr support shard split in the master/slave setup. I understand that
there is no shard concept is master/slave and we just have cores but can we
split a core into two.
If yes is there way to specify new mapping based on the unique key.
--
— Pushkar Raste
Hi we have a new setup of solr 7.7 without cloud in a master/slave setup
Periodically our core stops responding to queries and must be
restarted on the slave.
Two hosts
is06 solr 7.7 master
ss06 solr 7.7 slave
simple replication is setup no solr cloud
so on the primary is06 we see this error
On 4/23/2019 2:04 AM, Anant Bhargatiya wrote:
We are migrating from solr 5.5 master slave to solr 8.0 cloud deployment.
for exactly same index and config, we are getting different results.
We'll need to see the configs you are working with as well as the raw
and parsed queries from
Hello,
We are migrating from solr 5.5 master slave to solr 8.0 cloud deployment.
for exactly same index and config, we are getting different results.
we also compared solr cloud (solr 8.0) and master slave (solr 8.0) with
same indexed data.
in all of above scenario we observed that different
Hmmm, afraid I'm out of my depth, perhaps some of the Lucene
folks can chime in.
Sorry I can't be more help.
Erick
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 12:27 AM damian.pawski wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I had to re-create the index as some tokenizers are not longer supported on
> the 7.x version.
> I have a fresh 7.x
Hi
I had to re-create the index as some tokenizers are not longer supported on
the 7.x version.
I have a fresh 7.x index.
Thank you
Damian
--
Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html
Hi
I had to re-create the index, as some Tokenizers are no longer supported on
7.X, so I have a fresh 7.x index, but still having issues with the
replication.
Thank you
Damian
--
Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html
Damian:
You say you've switched from 5x to 7x. Did you try to use an index
created with 5x or did you index fresh with 7x? Solr/Lucene do not
guarantee backward compatibility across more than one major version.
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:34 AM damian.pawski wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We have swi
Hi,
We have switched from 5.4 to 7.2.1 and we have started to see more issues
with the replication.
I think it may be related to the fact that a delta import was started during
a full import (not the case for the Solr 5.4).
I am getting below error:
XXX: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException:java.l
Hi,
Facing issue in Solr 7.2.1 Master-slave replication,
Master-slave replication is working fine.
But if I disable replication from master, Slaves shows no data
(numFound=0). Slave in not serving data, it had before replication.
I suspect, Index generation is getting updated in slave, which was
ts as each Core
> has its own unique Schema.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kelly
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Erick Erickson
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 8:50 PM
> To: solr-user
> Subject: Re: Replicate managed-schema in Solr Master/Slave Configuration
>
&g
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 8:50 PM
To: solr-user
Subject: Re: Replicate managed-schema in Solr Master/Slave Configuration
On a quick glance at the code, I don't see anything requiring an xml extension
for the managed schema. I suppose it'
JIRA.
Best,
Erick
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Kelly Rusk wrote:
> Hello all,
> I need to replicate the managed-schema in my Solr 6.6.2 Master/Slave
> environment and have added the necessary replication handlers. However, as
> the managed-schema does not have a file extension
Hello all,
I need to replicate the managed-schema in my Solr 6.6.2 Master/Slave
environment and have added the necessary replication handlers. However, as the
managed-schema does not have a file extension it doesn't seem to get picked
up/replicated:
schema.xml,managed-schema,stopwords.tx
cause it already exists in the store!
Thanks,
Kelly
-Original Message-
From: Kelly Rusk [mailto:kelly.r...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 8:51 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Solr 6.6.2 Master/Slave SSL Replication Error
Makes p
Makes perfect sense! Should I use the key tool to import the Certs? If so, do
you have an example you prefer or should I just pull from the docs?
Regards,
Kelly
_
From: Shawn Heisey
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: Solr 6.6.2 Master/Slave SSL
On 4/22/2018 6:27 PM, Kelly Rusk wrote:
Thanks for the assistance. The Master Server has a self-signed Cert with its
machine name, and the Slave has a self-signed Cert with its machine name.
They have identical configurations, and I created a keystore per server. Should
I import the self-signe
keystore? Or are you stating
that I need to copy the keystore over to the Slave instead of having the one I
created?
Regards,
Kelly
_
From: Shawn Heisey
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2018 7:56 PM
Subject: Re: Solr 6.6.2 Master/Slave SSL Replication Error
To:
On 4/22/2018 4
1 - 100 of 521 matches
Mail list logo
