You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Noble Paul <no...@gmail.com> on 2019/07/08 01:50:59 UTC
Re: Concerned about Solr's V2 API synchronized with V1
This is a problem. V2 APIs need a lot more metadata and nobody is doing it.
This leads to a lot of technical debt
On Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:42 AM David Smiley <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm concerned about Solr's V2 API and the maintenance burden of attempting
> to maintain consistency with V1. For example upon looking through the
> release notes and seeing a new exciting REINDEXCOLLECTION command (a V1
> reference), I see no corresponding adjustments in V2 --
> lucene-solr/solr/solrj/src/resources/apispec/* It's so easy for this to
> fall out of sync. When working on a feature affecting admin API stuff I
> need to somehow just remember/know and then ask myself if I want to test a
> new feature with just one API or both. Ugh. Additionally, the vast
> majority of our documentation is in V1, and our help in solr-user and
> elsewhere often uses a one-liner URL to the V1 API as well.
>
> As if Solr needed more maintenance challenges than it has already (e.g.
> tests). :-(
>
> I mainly want to point out this problem right now to see if others also
> see the problem and if anyone else has thought about it. While working on
> Time Routed Aliases, I saw it but didn't call it out. I thought maybe
> somehow our implementation of the admin functionality could be done
> differently so as to nearly require a V2 adjustment, and thus we don't
> forget. For example if the V2 API was basically primary, and if it had
> metadata that described how a virtual V1 API could work based off metadata
> in the V2 apispec there that does mapping. In this way, everything would
> work in V2 and V1 by default, or at least the majority of the time. V2
> requires more information than V1, so if we continue to have V1 primary
> (i.e. do nothing), V2 will always be falling behind.
>
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>
Re: Concerned about Solr's V2 API synchronized with V1
Posted by Cassandra Targett <ca...@gmail.com>.
The v2 examples that are in the Ref Guide already use the widget you mention. See something like https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/adding-custom-plugins-in-solrcloud-mode.html#config-api-commands-to-use-jars-as-runtime-libraries for an example.
SOLR-11646 tracks the effort to add v2 examples and lists which pages have been updated and which remain to be done. I left the Collections APIs (the hardest) for last, but haven’t had time to get back to it recently. Whenever I make examples I make real examples I’ve actually tested, so I need to have enough time to actually run through each one of them for the alternate syntaxes.
Cassandra
On Jul 8, 2019, 1:09 PM -0500, Gus Heck <gu...@gmail.com>, wrote:
> We have places where there are curl/solrj alternatives in the examples. Maybe a similar widget could be used for V1/V2 examples? or even better v1/v2/solrj examples for collections api :)
>
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 2:02 PM Gus Heck <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Also the Collections API docs are almost devoid of v2 examples. Just fixing this would provide a really good reminder to those implementing features to check that it works in v2. (unless they add features without documenting them... which usually doesn't happen)
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 9:51 PM Noble Paul <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > This is a problem. V2 APIs need a lot more metadata and nobody is doing it. This leads to a lot of technical debt
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:42 AM David Smiley <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I'm concerned about Solr's V2 API and the maintenance burden of attempting to maintain consistency with V1. For example upon looking through the release notes and seeing a new exciting REINDEXCOLLECTION command (a V1 reference), I see no corresponding adjustments in V2 -- lucene-solr/solr/solrj/src/resources/apispec/* It's so easy for this to fall out of sync. When working on a feature affecting admin API stuff I need to somehow just remember/know and then ask myself if I want to test a new feature with just one API or both. Ugh. Additionally, the vast majority of our documentation is in V1, and our help in solr-user and elsewhere often uses a one-liner URL to the V1 API as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As if Solr needed more maintenance challenges than it has already (e.g. tests). :-(
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I mainly want to point out this problem right now to see if others also see the problem and if anyone else has thought about it. While working on Time Routed Aliases, I saw it but didn't call it out. I thought maybe somehow our implementation of the admin functionality could be done differently so as to nearly require a V2 adjustment, and thus we don't forget. For example if the V2 API was basically primary, and if it had metadata that described how a virtual V1 API could work based off metadata in the V2 apispec there that does mapping. In this way, everything would work in V2 and V1 by default, or at least the majority of the time. V2 requires more information than V1, so if we continue to have V1 primary (i.e. do nothing), V2 will always be falling behind.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ~ David Smiley
> > > > > > > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> > > > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
> > > http://www.the111shift.com (play)
>
>
> --
> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
> http://www.the111shift.com (play)
Re: Concerned about Solr's V2 API synchronized with V1
Posted by Gus Heck <gu...@gmail.com>.
We have places where there are curl/solrj alternatives in the examples.
Maybe a similar widget could be used for V1/V2 examples? or even better
v1/v2/solrj examples for collections api :)
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 2:02 PM Gus Heck <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also the Collections API docs are almost devoid of v2 examples. Just
> fixing this would provide a really good reminder to those implementing
> features to check that it works in v2. (unless they add features without
> documenting them... which usually doesn't happen)
>
> On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 9:51 PM Noble Paul <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a problem. V2 APIs need a lot more metadata and nobody is doing
>> it. This leads to a lot of technical debt
>>
>> On Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:42 AM David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm concerned about Solr's V2 API and the maintenance burden of
>>> attempting to maintain consistency with V1. For example upon looking
>>> through the release notes and seeing a new exciting REINDEXCOLLECTION
>>> command (a V1 reference), I see no corresponding adjustments in V2 --
>>> lucene-solr/solr/solrj/src/resources/apispec/* It's so easy for this to
>>> fall out of sync. When working on a feature affecting admin API stuff I
>>> need to somehow just remember/know and then ask myself if I want to test a
>>> new feature with just one API or both. Ugh. Additionally, the vast
>>> majority of our documentation is in V1, and our help in solr-user and
>>> elsewhere often uses a one-liner URL to the V1 API as well.
>>>
>>> As if Solr needed more maintenance challenges than it has already (e.g.
>>> tests). :-(
>>>
>>> I mainly want to point out this problem right now to see if others also
>>> see the problem and if anyone else has thought about it. While working on
>>> Time Routed Aliases, I saw it but didn't call it out. I thought maybe
>>> somehow our implementation of the admin functionality could be done
>>> differently so as to nearly require a V2 adjustment, and thus we don't
>>> forget. For example if the V2 API was basically primary, and if it had
>>> metadata that described how a virtual V1 API could work based off metadata
>>> in the V2 apispec there that does mapping. In this way, everything would
>>> work in V2 and V1 by default, or at least the majority of the time. V2
>>> requires more information than V1, so if we continue to have V1 primary
>>> (i.e. do nothing), V2 will always be falling behind.
>>>
>>> ~ David Smiley
>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>
>>
>
> --
> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
> http://www.the111shift.com (play)
>
--
http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
http://www.the111shift.com (play)
Re: Concerned about Solr's V2 API synchronized with V1
Posted by Gus Heck <gu...@gmail.com>.
Also the Collections API docs are almost devoid of v2 examples. Just fixing
this would provide a really good reminder to those implementing features to
check that it works in v2. (unless they add features without documenting
them... which usually doesn't happen)
On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 9:51 PM Noble Paul <no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a problem. V2 APIs need a lot more metadata and nobody is doing
> it. This leads to a lot of technical debt
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019, 3:42 AM David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm concerned about Solr's V2 API and the maintenance burden of
>> attempting to maintain consistency with V1. For example upon looking
>> through the release notes and seeing a new exciting REINDEXCOLLECTION
>> command (a V1 reference), I see no corresponding adjustments in V2 --
>> lucene-solr/solr/solrj/src/resources/apispec/* It's so easy for this to
>> fall out of sync. When working on a feature affecting admin API stuff I
>> need to somehow just remember/know and then ask myself if I want to test a
>> new feature with just one API or both. Ugh. Additionally, the vast
>> majority of our documentation is in V1, and our help in solr-user and
>> elsewhere often uses a one-liner URL to the V1 API as well.
>>
>> As if Solr needed more maintenance challenges than it has already (e.g.
>> tests). :-(
>>
>> I mainly want to point out this problem right now to see if others also
>> see the problem and if anyone else has thought about it. While working on
>> Time Routed Aliases, I saw it but didn't call it out. I thought maybe
>> somehow our implementation of the admin functionality could be done
>> differently so as to nearly require a V2 adjustment, and thus we don't
>> forget. For example if the V2 API was basically primary, and if it had
>> metadata that described how a virtual V1 API could work based off metadata
>> in the V2 apispec there that does mapping. In this way, everything would
>> work in V2 and V1 by default, or at least the majority of the time. V2
>> requires more information than V1, so if we continue to have V1 primary
>> (i.e. do nothing), V2 will always be falling behind.
>>
>> ~ David Smiley
>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>
>
--
http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
http://www.the111shift.com (play)