my think about solr replication

[James liu <li...@gmail.com>]

solr have its replication way and it use rsync transport.

i try it but not success maybe because i m poor in freebsd.(if u know how to
config and use, tell me and i will be very happy.:) )

when i use mysql replication, i think why not use it?

master: mysql (innodb or isam),   slave: mysql(isam), master---->slave with
replication.

we just write program in slave to read the data which solrflag is 0  and
index it.

User can seach through slave's index data.


if more solr's server, maybe use slave group.
       master 1 ---->   slave 1
       master 2 ---> slave 2
       .....
       master n ---> slave n

i only test one master-> one slave

it can help we use multi platform..


maybe it have wrong or not fits for thousands searching

let me know what u think.





-- 
regards
jl

Re: my think about solr replication

[Yonik Seeley <yo...@apache.org>]

On 1/17/07, James liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> when i use mysql replication, i think why not use it?

Perhaps doable, but every slave would need to re-index the same
documents pulled from the db.  It would be more CPU and resource
intensive and harder to keep in sync.  If you get a corrupted disk,
how to you recover except to rebuild everything from the db (and that
means a long outage).

Same issues go for other document distribution methods such as using a
message queues.

Anyway, if this type of distribution works for you, use it!
Solr's distribution mechanism is optional.

-Yonik

Re: my think about solr replication

[Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>]

: i try it but not success maybe because i m poor in freebsd.(if u know how to
: config and use, tell me and i will be very happy.:) )

for the record, i'm sure the bug with using the distribution scripts on
FreeBSD is a minor one, it just needs someone with some expertise in
BSD/bash to take a look at it ... regretably i am not one of those
people...

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-93

-Hoss