about <1>. Well, at a high level you're right, of course.
Having the EFF stuff in a single place seems more elegant. But
then ugly details crop up. I.e. "one place" implies that you'd have
to fetch them over the network, potentially a very expensive
operation every time there was a commit. Is this really a good
tradeoff? With high network latency, this could be a performance
killer. But I suspect that the real reason is that nobody has found
a compelling use-case for this kind of thing. Until and unless
someone does, and is willing to make a patch, it'll be theory :).

bq:  modifications also sent to replicas
with this kind of commits

brief review:

Update process:
1> Update goes to a node.
2> node forwards to all leaders
3> leader forward to replicas
4> replicas respond to their leader.
5> leader responds to originating node.
6> originating node responds to caller.

At this point all the replicas for your entire cluster have the
update. This is entirely independent of commits. Whenever a
commit is issued the documents currently pending on a node
are committed and made visible to a searcher.

If one is relying on solrconfig settings, then the commit happens
a little bit out of synch. Let's say that the commit (hard with
opensearcher=true or soft) is set to 60 seconds. Each node may
have a different commit time, depending upon when it was started.
So there may be a slight difference in when documents are visible.
You'll probably never notice.

If you issue commits from a client, then the commit is propagated
to all nodes in the cluster.

HTH,
Erick


On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > 1> I'm not quite sure I understand. External File Fields are keyed
> > by the unique id of the doc. So every shard _must_ have the
> > eff available for at least the documents in that shard. At first glance
> > this doesn't look simple. Perhaps a bit more explanation of what
> > you're using EFF for?
> >
> Thanks Erick for the reply, I use EFF for boosting results by popularity.
> So I was right, I should put popularity in every shard data dir..right? But
> why not keeping that file in just one place (obviously the file should be
> reachable by all solrcloud nodes...) and allow external fields to be
> outside data dir?
>
> >
> > 2> Let's be sure we're talking about the same thing here. In Solr,
> > a "commit" is the command that makes documents visible, often
> > controlled by the autoCommit and autoSoftCommit settings in
> > solrconfig.xml. You will not be able to issue 100 commits/second.
> >
> > If you're using "commit" to mean adding a document to the index,
> > then 100/s should be no problem. I regularly see many times that
> > ingestion rate. The documents won't be visible to search until
> > you do a commit however.
> >
> Yeah, now it is more clear. Still a question: for my client is not a
> problem to soft commit but, are the modifications also sent to replicas
> with this kind of commits?
>
> >
> > Best
> > Erick
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Flavio Pompermaier <
> pomperma...@okkam.it
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi to all,
> > > we're migrating from solr 3.x to solr 4.x to use Solrcloud and I have
> two
> > > big doubts:
> > >
> > > 1) External fields. When I compute such a file do I have to copy it in
> > the
> > >  data directory of shards..? The external fields boosts the results of
> > the
> > > query to a specific collection, for me it doesn't make sense to put it
> in
> > > all shard's data dir, it should be something related to the collection
> > > itself.
> > > Am I wrong or missing something? Is there a simple way to upload the
> > > popularity file (for the external field) at one in all shards?
> > >
> > > 2) My index requires frequently commits (i.e. sometimes up to 100/s).
> How
> > > do I have to manage this? Do I have to use soft commits..? Any simple
> > > configuration/code snippet to use them? Is it true that external fields
> > > affect performance on commit?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Flavio
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to