IMO each mega of memory saved has more impact that 0.001 less in latency … an OOM is killer, a lag of 2 second … is not catastrophic.
— /Yago Riveiro On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just to pile on: > I admire your bravery! I'll add to the other comments only by saying > that _before_ you start down this path, you really need to articulate > the benefit/cost analysis. "to gain a little more communications > efficiency" will be a pretty hard sell due to the reasons Shawn > outlined. This is hugely risky and would require a lot of work for > as-yet-unarticulated benefits. > There are lots and lots of other things to work on of significantly > greater impact IMO. How would you like to work on something to help > manage Solr's memory usage for instance ;)? > Best, > Erick > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Reitzel, Charles > <charles.reit...@tiaa-cref.org> wrote: >> A couple thoughts: >> 0. Interesting topic. >> 1. But perhaps better suited to the dev list. >> 2. Given the existing architecture, shouldn't we be looking to transport >> projects, e.g. Jetty, Apache HttpComponents, for support of new socket or >> even HTTP layer protocols? >> 3. To the extent such support exists, then integration work is still needed >> at the solr level. Shalin, is this your intention? >> >> Also, for those of us not tracking protocol standards in detail, can you >> describe the benefits to Solr users of http/2? >> >> Do you expect HTTP/2 to be transparent at the application layer? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Shalin Shekhar Mangar [mailto:shalinman...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 6:23 AM >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Solr TCP layer >> >> Hi Saumitra, >> >> I've been thinking of adding http/2 support for inter node communication >> initially and client server communication next in Solr. There's a patch for >> SPDY support but now that spdy is deprecated and http/2 is the new standard >> we need to wait for Jetty 9.3 to release. That will take care of many >> bottlenecks in solrcloud communication. The current trunk is already using >> jetty 9.2.x which has support for the draft http/2 spec. >> >> A brand new async TCP layer based on netty can be considered but that's a >> huge amount of work considering our need to still support simple http, SSL >> etc. Frankly for me that effort is better spent optimizing the routing layer. >> On 09-Mar-2015 1:37 am, "Saumitra Srivastav" <saumitra.srivast...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Solr Contributors, >>> >>> I want to start working on adding a TCP layer for client to node and >>> inter-node communication. >>> >>> I am not up to date on recent changes happening to Solr. So before I >>> start looking into code, I would like to know if there is already some >>> work done in this direction, which I can reuse. Are there any know >>> challenges/complexities? >>> >>> I would appreciate any help to kick start this effort. Also, what >>> would be the best way to discuss and get feedback on design from >>> contributors? Open a JIRA?? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Saumitra >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-TCP-layer-tp4191715.html >>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> ************************************************************************* >> This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. >> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately >> and then delete it. >> >> TIAA-CREF >> *************************************************************************
