Hehe, «self» can be self as in user or self as in Solr :) Legacy feels like something that is going away, and so far the «standalone» mode is not going anywhere. Cassandra, feel free to propose what is your best shot and then I don’t think we need a poll for it, but suffice a bunch of +1 on this thread.
Managed Cluster vs Non-managed Cluster? Managed Cluster vs User Managed Cluster? Jan > 11. aug. 2020 kl. 16:21 skrev Cassandra Targett <casstarg...@gmail.com>: > > OK, fair point about self-managed. But I object to "leaving it" as Legacy, as > I've previously explained (I put that in quotes because it’s not always > called that at all - it has at least 3 names right now). > > The reality is someone can come up with an objection to every single > possibility. Someday we have to live with something that’s good enough and > move forward, or we’ll end up just living with the total mash of things we > have today. Which maybe is fine with everyone. > > I’ve tried to put real mental work into thinking about a good name, and have > tried to compromise based on feedback. At this point, though, unless someone > else comes up with something I’m likely done here. We’ll just “leave it” all > as it is now. > > Cassandra > On Aug 11, 2020, 9:11 AM -0500, Ishan Chattopadhyaya > <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>, wrote: >> I object to "self managed". It gives the impression that Solr manages >> itself, whereas it is the other way around: users need to manage the >> standalone mode with lots of manual effort, as opposed to SolrCloud which is >> in spirit self managed (solr manages itself using zk). >> >> I'm +1 with Legacy replication and SolrCloud replication for now. Later, we >> can get rid of "SolrCloud" and call it something else. Also, once SolrCloud >> is stable enough, we can get rid of legacy mode altogether. We can discuss >> that elsewhere. >> >> On Tue, 11 Aug, 2020, 7:16 pm Cassandra Targett, <casstarg...@gmail.com >> <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> I don’t feel there is a consensus for me to move forward confidently, but >> the docs need to be fixed before 8.7. I’ve thought about Ilan’s suggestion, >> and like calling the non-SolrCloud cluster “self-managed”. It avoids the >> currently awkward phrasing and any misinterpretation of my original >> suggestion with clumsiness as Gus pointed out. Can everyone live with that? >> >> If so, that leaves what we might eventually call SolrCloud is the remaining >> sticking point. It’s not a problem that needs to be solved today as the term >> isn’t going anywhere yet since there aren’t any patches or PRs to change it >> at a code level. >> >> Barring further objections, then, I think I will go ahead with mostly >> leaving “SolrCloud” as it is, and replacing/modifying “Legacy Scaling”, >> “leader/follower mode”, some cases of “Standalone mode”, and similar >> constructions with “Self-Managed Mode” or “Self-Managed Cluster”, etc., as >> appropriate. >> >> Cassandra >> On Aug 7, 2020, 9:05 AM -0500, Cassandra Targett <casstarg...@gmail.com >> <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>>, wrote: >>> The suggestion to use “managed” and maybe “self-managed” is an interesting >>> one. Do you think it’s possible some might confuse that with the other ways >>> we use managed - like the “managed-schema”, and “managed resources” >>> (synonyms and stop words)? Neither of those are cluster-specific, and I >>> wonder if the overlap in terminology would cause them to be conflated. >>> >>> Cassandra >>> On Aug 6, 2020, 10:51 AM -0500, Ilan Ginzburg <ilans...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:ilans...@gmail.com>>, wrote: >>>> Both "legacy" and "SolrCloud" clusters are search server clusters. Seen >>>> from far enough, they look the same. >>>> >>>> In "legacy" the management code is elsewhere (developed by the client >>>> operating the cluster, running on other machines using a diferent logic >>>> and potentially another DB than Zookeeper) whereas in "SolrCloud" the >>>> management code is embedded in the search server(s) code and it happens >>>> that (currently) this code relies on Zookeeper. >>>> >>>> I see SolrCloud as a "managed cluster" vs. legacy that would be "Self >>>> managed" by the client, or "U manage" (non managed when looking at it from >>>> the Solr codebase perspective). >>>> >>>> Same idea as coordinated vs uncoordinated basically. I don't know why but >>>> I prefer "managed". >>>> >>>> Ilan >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:49 PM Cassandra Targett <casstarg...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> On Aug 6, 2020, 10:22 AM -0500, Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:gus.h...@gmail.com>>, wrote: >>>> WRT the name "uncoordinated mode" I fear it could be read (or even become >>>> known as) as "clumsy mode" which is humorous but possibly not what we're >>>> going for :) >>>> >>>> I had also considered “non-coordinated”, and prefer it but couldn’t >>>> articulate why. The association of “uncoordinated" with clumsiness might >>>> be what was bugging me. >>>> I'd perhaps suggest Cluster mode for SolrCloud though I'm not entirely >>>> sure if Legacy Solr (in curren parlance) is not a "cluster" too, cluster >>>> being a somewhat vague term. However Clustered Mode and Legacy Mode seem >>>> more on target. I think "Legacy" could be changed since we're not really >>>> planning on abandoning it (are we?), but >>>> >>>> One can have a cluster and not run SolrCloud. I think from an operations >>>> perspective, several servers all running Solr is considered a cluster, no >>>> matter what tools are being used to get them to talk to each other. >>>> >>>> I think “Legacy” (also used today already in some contexts) is problematic >>>> because there aren’t plans to abandon it. Also “Legacy replication” is >>>> pretty close to exactly what PULL replicas use to poll leaders and pull >>>> new index segments when needed. IOW, it’s not “legacy”, it’s very actively >>>> being used in a growing number of clusters. That might be an >>>> implementation detail users aren’t aware of, but I feel the term is really >>>> lacking mostly in that it just doesn’t say anything besides “it’s older”. >>>> the adjective there SHOULD communicate reduced functionality because there >>>> are plenty of features that are cloud (cluster) only. >>>> >>>> In my view, the reduced functionality of non-SolrCloud clusters is mostly >>>> around coordination of requests, leader election, configs, and other >>>> similar automated activities one does manually otherwise. So, I feel that >>>> sort of proves my point - a word that conveys lack of coordination is a >>>> good option for what it’s called. If there is a better antonym for >>>> “coordinated”, I’m all for considering it but haven’t yet been able to >>>> think of/find one. >>>> >>>> I think it’s important to think about what differentiates the two ways of >>>> managing a Solr cluster and derive the naming from that. What features of >>>> SolrCloud don’t exist in the non-SolrCloud approach? What words help us >>>> generalize those gaps and can any of them be an appropriate name? >>>> >>>> -Gus >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:27 AM Cassandra Targett <casstarg...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> The work in SOLR-14702 has left us with some awkward phrasing (which is >>>> still better than what it was) around non-SolrCloud clusters that I've >>>> offered to help fix. >>>> >>>> I think we've struggled for years to find a good name for non-SolrCloud >>>> clusters and we've used a number of variations: "legacy replication" >>>> (which it isn't, since PULL replicas use the same thing), "Standalone >>>> mode" (which it isn't because it's a cluster), now "leader/follower mode" >>>> (which could be confusing because SolrCloud has leaders). >>>> >>>> Yesterday I thought about what really differentiates a SolrCloud cluster >>>> and a non-SolrCloud cluster and it occurred to me that a key difference is >>>> the former is coordinated by ZooKeeper, while the latter is not. That led >>>> me to think that perhaps "coordinated mode" can someday be a better >>>> replacement for the term "SolrCloud", while "uncoordinated mode" could be >>>> a replacement today for all these other non-SolrCloud mode variations. >>>> >>>> I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14716 >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14716> and will create a >>>> branch for work in progress, but before I forge too far ahead, I want to >>>> draw attention to it first to give a chance for discussion so we're in >>>> agreement. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Cassandra >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com <http://www.needhamsoftware.com/> (work) >>>> http://www.the111shift.com <http://www.the111shift.com/> (play)
