So how are people managing solrconfig.xml files which are largely the
same other than differences for replication?
I don't think it's a "good thing" to maintain two copies of the same
file and I'd like to avoid that. Maybe enabling the XInclude feature
in DocumentBuilders would make it possible to modularize configuration
files to make this possible?
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/javax/xml/parsers/DocumentBuilderFactory.html#setXIncludeAware(boolean)
-Bryan
On May 12, 2009, at May 12, 11:43 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Bryan Talbot
<[email protected]>wrote:
For replication in 1.4, the wiki at
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrReplication says that a node can be
both
the master and a slave:
A node can act as both master and slave. In that case both the
master and
slave configuration lists need to be present inside the
ReplicationHandler
requestHandler in the solrconfig.xml.
What does this mean? Does the core then poll itself for updates?
No. This type of configuration is meant for "repeaters". Suppose
there are
slaves in multiple data-centers (say data center A and B). There is
always a
single master (say in A). One of the slaves in B is used as a master
for the
other slaves in B. Therefore, this one slave in B is both a master
as well
as the slave.
I'd like to have a single set of configuration files that are
shared by
masters and slaves and avoid duplicating configuration details in
multiple
files (one for master and one for slave) to ease management and
failover.
Is this possible?
You wouldn't want the master to be a slave. So I guess you'd need to
have a
separate file. Also, it needs to be a separate file so that the
slave does
not become a master when the solrconfig.xml is replicated.
When I attempt to setup a multi server master-slave configuration and
include both master and slave replication configuration options, I
into some
problems. I'm running a nightly build from May 7.
Not sure what happened. Is that the url for this solr (meaning same
solr url
is master and slave of itself)? If yes, that is not a valid
configuration.
--
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
