Thank your for your reply. I will take a look at both the code for bootstrapping, and look at what you are suggesting to determine what to do.
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Shawn Heisey <elyog...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 2/24/2018 8:05 AM, Marvin Bredal Lillehaug wrote: > >> This is for doing local development and running tests. >> So starting with embedded zookeeper in SolrCloud mode is intentional. The >> idea is to just run the script setting up the folder structure for the >> cores and everything is up and running, ready for indexing and querying >> locally. >> The applications using Solr also use Zookeeper for configuration and >> coordination of their own stuff. >> >> There are no persmission issues. >> >> I have put the scripts here https://github.com/computerlove/start-solr >> >> The file config specifies what version to use. When running >> run-dev-solr.sh >> that version is downloaded, solrhome is copied to the right place and the >> instance is started. >> > > I grabbed the git repo and proceeded to fiddle with it. > > As you said, it works when the solr version that is downloaded is 6.6.2, > but fails with 7.2.1. Based on what gets logged and what I know about how > Solr does initialization, I'm betting the bootstrap feature is broken. I > can't tell what's wrong, but I think that's probably where the problem is. > > But as I already said, I strongly recommend that you don't use that > feature. At all. > > The cores that are in the git repo are empty -- there's no index. If the > source cores are empty when you run the script "for real", then I have an > alternate idea for you to try: > > Instead of copying the cores and bootstrapping a non-cloud install into a > cloud install: Remove the bootstrap option. Create the collections using > "bin/solr create", with -replicationFactor 1 -shards 1, and the -d option > pointing at the config you want uploaded for the collection. You could > even go with a higher shard count if you want. Increasing > replicationFactor is probably possible, but as all this would be running on > a single server, there's no point. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > -- med vennlig hilsen, Marvin B. Lillehaug
