Re: SolrJ vs. plain old HTTP post

Thanks Shalin and all for helping with this question. It is much appreciated. Steve On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar < shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Steven White > wrote: > > > Thanks Erik and Emir. > > > > > > > > > To close the loop

Re: SolrJ vs. plain old HTTP post

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Steven White wrote: > Thanks Erik and Emir. > > > > To close the loop on this question, I will need to enable Jetty's SSL (the > jetty that comes with Solr 5.1). If I do so, will SolrJ still work, can I > assume that SolrJ supports SSL? > > Yes, SolrJ can work

Re: SolrJ vs. plain old HTTP post

Thanks Erik and Emir. Erik: The fact that SolrJ is aware of SolrCloud is enough to put it over plain old HTTP post. Emir: I looked into Solr's data import handler, unfortunately, it won't work for my need. To close the loop on this question, I will need to enable Jetty's SSL (the jetty that come

Re: SolrJ vs. plain old HTTP post

Another advantage to SolrJ is with SolrCloud (ZK) awareness, and taking advantage of some routing optimizations client-side so the cluster has less hops to make. — Erik Hatcher, Senior Solutions Architect http://www.lucidworks.com > On May 11, 2015, at 8:21 AM, S

Re: SolrJ vs. plain old HTTP post

Hi Steve, Main advantage is that it uses binary format so XML/JSON overhead is avoided. You should also check out if SOLR's Data Import Handler is good fit for you. Thanks, Emir -- Monitoring * Alerting * Anomaly Detection * Centralized Log Management Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sem