Hi Shalin, Thank you for the mail. My main purpose of having 2 identical cores COREX - always serves user request COREY - every day once, takes the updates/latest data and passess it on to COREX. is:-
Suppose say I have only one COREY and suppose a request comes to COREY while the update of the latest data is happening on to it. Wouldn't it degrade performance of the requests at that point of time? So I was planning to keep COREX and COREY always identical. Once COREY has the latest it should somehow sync with COREX so that COREX also now has the latest. COREY keeps on getting the updates at a particular time of day and it will again pass it on to COREX. This process continues everyday. What is the best possible way to implement this? Thanks, Mark. On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar < shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. >
