I guess all I mean is that it shouldn't be only sysprops. Enabling sysprops, Env vars etc seems fine but we need to clearly document precedence among any/all options. What is convenient varies from case to case and in a perfect world what I'd like to see is full support across each style (files, zk, props, env vars) with consistent and obvious naming and well documented resolution order.
What I don't like is a little bit of env vars for some stuff, props for others, files for yet more stuff and some unclear aggregation of that showing up in zk... (or maybe some of it not showing up anywhere code could check it...) On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 11:07 AM Houston Putman <houstonput...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with Jan, when thinking about making Solr as cloud friendly as > possible EnvVars and (to a lesser extent) sysProps are much preferable than > having a setting in the solr.xml. > This is because it's easier to customize EnvVars per-node, while > customizing a config file is much harder, as those tend to be static and > shared across a whole environment. > > Also thanks for linking that SIP Jan, very applicable. > > - Houston > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 5:19 PM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote: > >> Thinking of these roles as labels, I think sysProps and envVars are the >> two universal methods, and nothing wrong with that. >> I keep trying to think cloud native and container, so having excellent >> 1st class support for env.vars for such configs is a priority to me. >> Most tools, CI-environments etc have built-in support for env.vars, and >> so it makes sense to me. >> >> See >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/SIP-11+Uniform+cluster-level+configuration+API >> for some interesting ideas around cluster/node level config. >> >> See >> >> 5. nov. 2021 kl. 15:04 skrev Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com>: >> >> Agree better to something other than sysprops. an arg in the start script >> would be friendlier than -D props which generally are irritatingly verbose >> and expose too much implementation. >> >> We lack a config file per level. solr.xml does double duty as global and >> per-node depending on how it's used (zk or filesystem). >> >> Config file names are confusing too. Our file names are legacy of >> non-cloud mode I think, and we really should at some point (10.x?) rework >> configs to be cluster.xml, node.xml, collection.xml (formerly >> solrconfig.xml) and schema.xml (and maybe support something other than xml, >> but that's not nearly as important as clarity in naming, and having >> features) >> >> But this is all straying way off topic and should have its own SIP if >> someone seems to have time for it :) >> >> On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 6:07 PM Shawn Heisey <elyog...@elyograg.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 11/4/21 2:51 PM, Noble Paul wrote: >>> > The SIP can be boiled down to the following >>> > >>> > * *Tag a node with a label (role) using a system property* >>> > ** Use the placement plugin to whitelist/block list certain nodes* >>> > ** Publish the roles through an API* >>> >>> >>> In general, for Solr, do we like the idea of having things controlled by >>> system properties? >>> >>> I would think solr.xml would be the right place to configure this, >>> except that people can and probably do put solr.xml in zookeeper, which >>> would mean every system would have the SAME solr.xml, and we're back to >>> system properties as a way to customize solr.xml on each system. >>> >>> I have never used system properties to configure Solr. When I customize >>> the config, I will often remove property substitutions from it and go >>> with explicit settings. My general opinion about system properties is >>> that if they're going to be used, they should DIRECTLY configure the >>> application, not be sent in via property substitution in a config file. >>> I've never liked the way our default configs use that paradigm. It >>> means you cannot look at the config and know exactly how things are >>> configured, without finding out whether system properties have been set. >>> >>> What color do others think that bikeshed should be painted? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Shawn >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> -- >> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >> >> >> -- http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) http://www.the111shift.com (play)
