Most of my customers switch to 4.0 without jumping on SolrCloud. Reason being that it currently is harder to set up. And when you have the need for one shard with 1-2 replicas it's pretty simple with old-style.
I think when managing the Solr config in ZK becomes easier more will want to migrate. Also, some users deliberately setup index-only masters and search-only slaves to avoid indexing wasting resources on the search nodes. So it would be good to be able to setup SolrCloud in master/slave mode, where you have all the goodies of centralized config and transaction log, but where master/slave replication is used (auto configured from ZK), and where search load balancer is aware of only querying the slaves, and DistributedUpdateProcessor is aware of not pushing updates to the slaves, since this will happen by pull. -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com 26. feb. 2013 kl. 07:23 skrev Walter Underwood <wun...@wunderwood.org>: > I cannot answer "yes" to any of those options. > > Master/slave and cloud have different strengths and weaknesses. We will use > each one where it is appropriate. > > The loose coupling in master/slave is a very good thing and increases > robustness for a corpus that does not have tight freshness requirements. > > wunder > > On Feb 25, 2013, at 7:55 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Quick poll to see what % of Solr users use SolrCloud vs. Master-slave setup: >> >> http://blog.sematext.com/2013/02/25/poll-solr-cloud-or-not/ >> >> I have to say I'm surprised with the results so far! >> >> Thanks, >> Otis >> -- >> Solr & ElasticSearch Support >> http://sematext.com/ > > > > >
