[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6513?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14189118#comment-14189118
]
Jan Høydahl commented on SOLR-6513:
-----------------------------------
I thought we agreed to prefer the term "shard" over "slice", so I think we
should do this for this API as well.
The *only* place in our refguide we use the word "slice" is in [How SolrCloud
Works|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/How+SolrCloud+Works]
\[1\] and that description is disputed.
The refguide explanation of what a shard is can be found in [Shards and
Indexing Data in
SolrCloud|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Shards+and+Indexing+Data+in+SolrCloud]
\[2\], quoting:
{quote}
When your data is too large for one node, you can break it up and store it in
sections by creating one or more shards. Each is a portion of the logical
index, or core, and it's the set of all nodes containing that section of the
index.
{quote}
So I'm proposing a rename of this API to {{BALANCESHARDUNIQUE}} and a rewrite
of \[1\].
\[1\] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/How+SolrCloud+Works
\[2\]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Shards+and+Indexing+Data+in+SolrCloud
> Add a collectionsAPI call BALANCESLICEUNIQUE
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6513
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6513
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Erick Erickson
> Assignee: Erick Erickson
> Fix For: 5.0, Trunk
>
> Attachments: SOLR-6513.patch, SOLR-6513.patch, SOLR-6513.patch,
> SOLR-6513.patch
>
>
> Another sub-task for SOLR-6491. The ability to assign a property on a
> node-by-node basis is nice, but tedious to get right for a sysadmin,
> especially if there are, say, 100s of nodes hosting a system. This JIRA would
> essentially provide an automatic mechanism for assigning a property. This
> particular command simply changes the cluster state, it doesn't do anything
> like re-assign functions.
> My idea for this version is fairly limited. You'd have to specify a
> collection and there would be no attempt to, say, evenly distribute the
> preferred leader role/property for this collection by looking at _other_
> collections. Or by looking at underlying hardware capabilities. Or....
> It would be a pretty simple round-robin assignment. About the only
> intelligence built in would be to change as few roles/properties as possible.
> Let's say that the correct number of nodes for this role turned out to be 3.
> Any node currently having 3 properties for this collection would NOT be
> changed. Any node having 2 properties would have one added that would be
> taken from some node with > 3 properties like this.
> This probably needs an optional parameter, something like
> "includeInactiveNodes=true|false"
> Since this is an arbitrary property, one must specify sliceUnique=true. So
> for the "preferredLeader" functionality, one would specify something like:
> action=BALANCESLICEUNIQUE&property=preferredLeader&proprety.value=true.
> There are checks in this code that require the preferredLeader to have a t/f
> value and require that sliceUnique bet true. That said, this can be called on
> an arbitrary property that has only one such property per slice.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
