SolrCloud should be indistinguishable from Solr w/ replication in terms of functionality, so this should work just fine.
SolrCloud should actually (and I'm kind of guessing here) give _better_ consistency than Solr w/ replication. Consider 4 slaves all with a polling interval of 10 minutes that just happened to start up every 2.5 minutes, and a master that committed every minute. The slaves would always be out-of-step with each other by up to 10 minutes. There's a lot of work in SolrCloud to make sure that all the replicas are all caught up before they start serving requests. An update to SolrCloud gets passed to all the replicas before being searchable. So just go for it <G>... Best Erick On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 5:11 AM, samarth s <samarth.s.seksa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I am currently using features like facet and group/collapse on solr 3.6. > The frequency of writing is user driven, and hence is expected to be > visible real time or at least near real time. These updates should be > consistent in facet and group results as well. Also to handle the query > load, I may have to use replication/sharding w/ or w/o solr cloud. > > I am planning to migrate to solr 4.0, and use its powerful features of NRT > ( soft commit ) and Solr Cloud ( using Zookeeper ) to achieve the above > requirements. > > Is a Solr Cloud with a replication level greater than 1, capable of giving > NRT results ? > If yes, do these NRT results work with all kinds of querying, like, > faceting and grouping ? > > It would be great if some one could share their insights and numbers on > these questions. > > -- > Regards, > Samarth
