I am using Mac OS 10.5. I can't access the box right now and this week. I'll do it next week and post the result then.
Thanks, Jianhan 2009/4/22 Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् <noble.p...@gmail.com> > which OS are you using? > > it does not look at the timestamps to decide if the index is in sync . > It looks at the index version only. > > BTW can you just hit the master withe url and paste the response here > > http://<masterhost>:<port>/solr/replication?command=filelist > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Jian Han Guo <jian...@gmail.com> wrote: > > That's right. The timestamp of files on the slave side are all Dec 31 > 1969, > > so it looks the timestamp was not set (and therefore it is zero). The > ones > > on the master side are all correct. Nevertheless, solr seems being able > to > > recognize that master and slave are in sync after replication. Don't know > > how it does that. > > > > I haven't check if the two machines are in sync, but even if they are > not, > > the timestamp should not be Dec 31, 1969, I think. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jianhan > > > > > > > > 2009/4/22 Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् <noble.p...@gmail.com> > > > >> Let me assume that you are using the in-inbuilt replication. > >> > >> The replication ties to set the timestamp of all the files same as > >> that of the files in the master. just cross check. > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:57 AM, Jian Han Guo <jian...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I am using nightly build on 4/22/2009. Replication works fine, but the > >> files > >> > inside index directory on slave side all have old timestamp: Dec 31 > >> 1969. > >> > Is this a known issue? > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > > >> > Jianhan > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> --Noble Paul > >> > > > > > > -- > --Noble Paul >
