I have to imagine I'm quibbling with the original assertion that "Solr 4.x is architected with a dependency on Zookeeper" when I say the following:
Solr 4.x is not architected with a dependency on Zookeeper. SolrCloud, however, is. As such, if a line of reasoning drives greater concern about Zookeeper than (necessarily) Solr's resiliency it can clearly be opted to use Solr 4.x without Zookeeper. I have to further imagine that isn't really the point of the original message. Unfortunately for me somehow I'm obsessing on saying it :) On May 3, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Dennis Haller <dhal...@talenttech.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Solr 4.x is architected with a dependency on Zookeeper, and Zookeeper is > expected to have a very high (perfect?) availability. With 3 or 5 zookeeper > nodes, it is possible to manage zookeeper maintenance and online > availability to be close to %100. But what is the worst case for Solr if > for some unanticipated reason all Zookeeper nodes go offline? > > Could someone comment on a couple of possible scenarios for which all ZK > nodes are offline. What would happen to Solr and what would be needed to > recover in each case? > 1) brief interruption, say <2 minutes, > 2) longer downtime, say 60 min > > Thanks > Dennis
