Hi Mark, On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Mark Fletcher <mark.fletcher2...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > I ran the SWAP command. Now:- > COREX has the dataDir pointing to the updated dataDir of COREY. So COREX > has the latest. > Again, COREY (on which the update regularly runs) is pointing to the old > index of COREX. So this now doesnt have the most updated index. > > Now shouldn't I update the index of COREY (now pointing to the old COREX) > so that it has the latest footprint as in COREX (having the latest COREY > index)so that when the update again happens to COREY, it has the latest and > I again do the SWAP. > > Is a physical copying of the index named COREY (the latest and now datDir > of COREX after SWAP) to the index COREX (now the dataDir of COREY.. the > orginal non-updated index of COREX) the best way for this or is there any > other better option. > > Once again, later when COREY is again updated with the latest, I will run > the SWAP again and it will be fine with COREX again pointing to its original > dataDir (now the updated one).So every even SWAP command run will point > COREX back to its original dataDir. (same case with COREY). > > My only concern is after the SWAP is done, updating the old index (which > was serving previously and now replaced by the new index). What is the best > way to do that? Physically copy the latest index to the old one and make it > in sync with the latest one so that by the time it is to get the latest > updates it has the latest in it so that the new ones can be added to this > and it becomes the latest and is again swapped? > Perhaps it is best if we take a step back and understand why you need two identical cores? -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
