Is it really a problem? I mean, as i see it, solr to cores is what
RDBMS is to databases. When you connect to a database you also need to
specify the database name.
Cheers,
Uri
On Sep 14, 2009, at 16:27, Noble Paul നോബിള് नो
ब्ळ् <noble.p...@corp.aol.com> wrote:
The problem is that, if we use multicore it forces you to use a core
name. this is inconvenient. We must get rid of this restriction before
we move single-core to multicore.
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Uri Boness <ubon...@gmail.com> wrote:
+1
Can you add a JIRA issue for that so we can vote for it?
Chris Hostetter wrote:
: > For the record: even if you're only going to have one
SOlrCore, using
the
: > multicore support (ie: having a solr.xml file) might prove
handy from
a
: > maintence standpoint ... the ability to configure new "on deck
cores"
with
...
: Yeah, it is a shame that single-core deployments (no solr.xml)
does not
have
: a way to enable CoreAdminHandler. This is something we should
definitely
: look at in Solr 1.5.
I think the most straight forward starting point is to switch how we
structure the examples so that all of the examples uses a solr.xml
with
multicore support.
Then we can move forward on deprecating the specification of "Solr
Home"
using JNDI/systemvars and switch to having the location of the
solr.xml be
the one master config option with everything else coming after that.
-Hoss
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Noble Paul | Principal Engineer| AOL | http://aol.com
