Chris Troullis created SOLR-10695:
-------------------------------------
Summary: Optimize implicit routing for nodes containing multiple
shards
Key: SOLR-10695
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10695
Project: Solr
Issue Type: Improvement
Security Level: Public (Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
Affects Versions: 6.5.1
Reporter: Chris Troullis
I asked a question on the Solr mailing list about some odd behavior I was
seeing when using implicit routing. Here is a snippet from my question:
"I created a collection using the implicit router, created 10 shards, named
shard1, shard2, etc. I indexed 3000 documents to each shard, routed by setting
the _route_ field on the documents in my schema. All works fine, I verified
there are 3000 documents in each shard.
The odd behavior I am seeing is when I try to route a query to a specific
shard. I submitted a simple query to shard1 using the request parameter
_route_=shard1. The query comes back fine, but when I looked in the logs, it
looked like it was issuing 3 separate requests:
1. The original query to shard1
2. A 2nd query to shard1 with the parameter ids=a bunch of document ids
3. The original query to a random shard (changes every time I run the query)"
[~shalinmangar] said that the behavior I was seeing was due to the fact that a
node has more than 1 shard from the same collection, and upon being routed to
such a node, the original shard is selected randomly, not taking the _route_
parameter into account. To quote:
"So to recap, this is happening because you have more than one shard1
hosted on a node. Easy workaround is to have each shard hosted on a
unique node. But we can improve things on the solr side as well by 1)
having SolrJ resolve requests down to node name and core name, 2)
having the collection name to core name resolution take _route_ param
into account. Both 1 and 2 can solve the problem."
Shalin asked me to log a JIRA for this, wasn't sure if I should log as a bug or
enhancement. He suggested 2 potential solutions (above). I am up for attempting
to implement one of these solutions. Does anyone have any more input, or a
preference as to how this is addressed? It seems to me like 2 would be the more
robust solution.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
