Modern network interfaces are pretty capable. I would doubt this optimization would yield any performance improvements. I would love to see some test results which prove me wrong.
is performance the primary reason for this? or do you have any other reasons. -Ani On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 6/11/2015 6:47 AM, MOIS Martin (MORPHO) wrote: > > is it possible to separate the network interface for inter-node > communication from the network interface for update/search requests? If so > I could put two network cards in each machine and route the index and > search traffic over the first interface and the traffic for the inter-node > communication (sending documents to replicas) over the second interface. > > Assuming you are using SolrCloud, you would do this by using the name or > IP address of the internal communication interface on the "host" > parameter in your solr.xml file (or -Dhost=foo on the startup > commandline). This will cause each node to register itself with > zookeeper using that interface. > > Note that what I've said above probably will not work with a cloud-aware > client like CloudSolrClient/CloudSolrServer in SolrJ, because that > client will obtain the server/port for each node from zookeeper and try > to contact each one directly. The necessary routing probably will not > be in place. > > If it's not SolrCloud, then the shards parameter that you are using for > distributed search would need internal names/addresses. > > The other interface, for queries and updates, would be the one with the > default gateway. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > -- Anirudha P. Jadhav
