[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16224209#comment-16224209
 ] 

Hoss Man commented on SOLR-11542:
---------------------------------

some confusion from the peanut gallery...

Can you elaborate a bit on why you see changes to DUP neccessary to support 
time based partitioning as opposed to a new DocRouter?  I see you initially 
explored this idea in SOLR-9690 but abandoned that appraoch -- can you explain 
how do you see the concerns/problems being easier to deal with via features in 
DUP?

(ie: needing to fail if a doc uses a Timestamp that doesn't match an existing 
is going to be a problem regardless of what bit of code maps timestamps to 
shard names)

My naive assumption is that all the problematic edge cases will still be 
problematic edge cases, but that a new DocRouter makes the most conceptual 
sense and should require the least amount of (new) spaghetti code -- not to 
mention it would in theory be more performant since it would allow 
CloudSolrClient to route documents directly to the correct shard.

In any event: I'm confused as to what caused you to make the leap from "new 
DocRouter" to "Helper class for DUP" -- if you could walk folks through that 
thought process it might be helpful to others besides myself.

> Add feature to DistributedURP to route time partitioned collections
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-11542
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11542
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>          Components: SolrCloud
>            Reporter: David Smiley
>             Fix For: 7.2
>
>
> Assuming we have some time partitioning metadata on an alias (see SOLR-11487 
> for the metadata facility), we'll then need to route documents to the right 
> collection.  I tentatively propose a helper class to DistributedURP to do 
> this.  Perhaps a separate URP is plausible, though it will take some 
> modifications to DistributedURP.
> The scope of this issue is:
> * decide on some alias metadata names & semantics
> * decide the collection suffix pattern.  Read/write code (needed to route).
> * the routing code
> No new partition creation nor deletion happens is this issue.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to