https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13159 filed

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:16 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm wondering if this is the multi-node manifestation of
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13142 ?
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:20 AM Andrzej Białecki <a...@getopt.org> wrote:
>
>> This merits a JIRA issue - things should not behave this way, that’s for
>> sure.
>>
>> Please create one, attach the ZK:/autoscaling.json and the output of
>> `/admin/collections?action=CLUSTERSTATUS` and the outputs from
>> /autoscaling/suggestions and /autoscaling/diagnostics - you can anonymize
>> actual node names as long as the data stays consistent (ie. the same node
>> names across all files).
>>
>> See also SOLR-13155.
>>
>> > On 18 Jan 2019, at 20:27, Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm a little worried about the state of Autoscaling. It looks like it
>> has the potential to create bad first experiences. Granted 8.0 isn't
>> supposed to be stable, but I'm seeing things that were documented for 7.6
>> not working in 8x
>> >
>> > TLDR:
>> >       • Default settings didn't distribute nodes evenly on brand new 50
>> node cluster
>> >       • Can't seem to write rules producing suggestions to distribute
>> them evenly
>> >       • Suggestions are made that then fail despite quiet cluster, no
>> changes.
>> > Long version:
>> >
>> > My Client and I did something that seems very vanilla but it didn't
>> work out well, and the observed behavior contradicts what's published in
>> https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_6/solr-upgrade-notes.html#solr-7-6
>> with respect to default core placement.
>> >
>> > The cluster is a 50 node AWS cluster that was freshly set up by a
>> client to test out 8.0.0 (8.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>> 69cbe29e78c400db22aab2f918405ce627d2d65d - solr - 2019-01-11 15:41:35).
>> >
>> > They created a collection (A) with 50 shards, one replica each (total
>> of50 cores). They specified maxShardsPerNode=1, and nothing relating to
>> autoscaling. They indexed a small amount of data in (33438861 docs is small
>> for them) for initial testing. They then handed it over to me, and not yet
>> noticing anything wrong with it I added a second collection (B) similarly
>> configured but with schema changes for comparison. However, I noticed at
>> that point that the nodes page was showing a very strange result for this
>> seemingly vanilla set of steps. Most nodes got one core of each collection,
>> but not all:
>> >
>> > Node 1 got 2 cores from A
>> > Node 2 got 0 cores
>> > Node 8 got 3 cores from B
>> > Node 21 got 2 cores from A and 1 from B
>> >
>> > I've spent all morning fiddling with rules to try to get a
>> configuration that provides suggestions via
>> /api/cluster/autoscaling/suggestions to equalize things and I just can't do
>> it. In particular I can't ever get any suggestion to move anything to node
>> 2. It's as if autoscaling is missing/unable to see node 2. A couple of
>> times I got suggestions with green buttons in the UI (mostly I'm using
>> Postman however)... when I clicked the green button it erred out saying
>> no-node can satisfy.... Nothing's changing, no data incoming so why is it
>> suggesting things that don't work?
>> >
>> > When I look at /autoscaling/diagnostics I get this seemingly impossible
>> result:
>> >             {
>> >                 "node": "solr-2.customer.redacted.com:8983_solr",
>> >                 "isLive": true,
>> >                 "cores": 2,
>> >                 "freedisk": 140.03918838500977,
>> >                 "totaldisk": 147.5209503173828,
>> >                 "replicas": {}
>> >             },
>> >
>> > 2 cores but no replicas? I looked on disk and there's no data on disk
>> representing a core.
>> >
>> > -Gus
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://www.the111shift.com
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> --
> http://www.the111shift.com
>


-- 
http://www.the111shift.com

Reply via email to