You can't. But index restoration should be a very rare thing, or you have some lurking problem in your process.
Or this is an XY problem, what problem are you trying to solve? see: http://people.apache.org/~hossman/#xyproblem Best Erick On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Dean Pullen <dean.pul...@semantico.com> wrote: > I can't understand, then, how we could ever restore and get replication to > work without manual intervention! > > Dean > > On 21 Dec 2011, at 16:37, Dean Pullen wrote: > >> I can't see a way, if the slave is on another server. >> >> We're going to upgrade solr - as you can delete the index after unloading a >> core in this way: >> >> cores?action=UNLOAD&core=liveCore&deleteIndex=true >> >> From v3.3 (I think) >> >> On 21 Dec 2011, at 16:11, Dean Pullen wrote: >> >>> Thought as much, thanks for the reply. >>> >>> Is there an easy way of dropping the index on the slave, or do I have to >>> manually delta the index files? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Dean. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 21 Dec 2011, at 15:54, Erick Erickson wrote: >>> >>>> You've probably hit it on the head. The slave version is greater than the >>>> master >>>> version, so replication isn't "necessary". BTW, the version starts >>>> life as a timestamp, >>>> but then is simply incremented on successive commits, which accounts for >>>> what you are seeing. >>>> >>>> You should be able to blow the index away on the slave and wait for >>>> replication >>>> and go from there. >>>> >>>> Another possibility: How much faith do you have in your slave index? >>>> If it's all good, >>>> you could simply copy *that* to the master manually and go from there. >>>> >>>> If you're rebuilding your entire index, just blow the master index >>>> away, re-index from >>>> scratch and that should work too (be sure to disable replication >>>> during the rebuild >>>> unless you want a partial index on the slave). >>>> >>>> Although copying the files *then* deciding not to use them doesn't seem >>>> like >>>> a good thing. Not sure if 3.x has the same behavior or not... >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Erick >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Dean Pullen <dean.pul...@semantico.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> E.g. I see this in the slave logs: >>>>> >>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,635 INFO handler.SnapPuller:265 - Master's version: >>>>> 1271406570655, generation: 376 >>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,635 INFO handler.SnapPuller:266 - Slave's version: >>>>> 1271406571565, generation: 1286 >>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,636 INFO handler.SnapPuller:267 - Starting >>>>> replication process >>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,639 INFO handler.SnapPuller:270 - Number of files in >>>>> latest index in master: 9 >>>>> … >>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:50,997 INFO handler.SnapPuller:286 - Total time taken >>>>> for download : 23 secs >>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:51,050 INFO handler.SnapPuller:586 - New index >>>>> installed. Updating index properties… >>>>> >>>>> Yet the index doesn't change! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 21 Dec 2011, at 15:37, Dean Pullen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have an odd problem locally when attempting replication with solr 1.4 >>>>>> >>>>>> The problem is, though the master files get copied to a temp directory >>>>>> in the slave data directory (I see this happen at runtime), they are >>>>>> then not copied over the actual slave index data. >>>>>> >>>>>> We were wondering if it was due to the index version of the restored >>>>>> master data being behind the slave index version after a restore? Any >>>>>> other ideas would be appreciated. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Dean Pullen >>>>> >>> >> >
