This http://www.nabble.com/multiple-indices-tf3982573.html thread triggers the question again. Solr-215 makes it easier to deploy multiple indexes than using multiple web applications; but is "easier" enough for not being just a superfluous feature?
Henrib wrote: > > > > The idea of the multiple core/indexes feature has been discussed in many > threads and it seems/seemed it has/had some functional value; how do we > ensure this value is generic enough for the issue (& patch) to ever be > solved? More importantly, is there an issue in the first place? > > For all use cases where it might make sense to use multiple indexes, the > common (as in community and commiters) wisdom is that one index is enough > and its schema will accommodate any functional need; from storing > documents that have no field in common to documents in different languages > or documents with varying publication workflows or lifetime, etc..., one > index (schema/config/core) - fits the functional bill. In very rare hard > cases, you might have to deploy multiple web applications. > > If having only one index is never a problem, the project has no need for a > patch that introduces multiple indexes. Thus, if the solr-215 issue is a > non-issue, what is the process to close it and mark it as 'invalid'? > It would be of great community value to state that thinking about using > multiple indexes is a mistake within the Solr project scope; use Lucene or > else if this is what you need. > > Is/should the single index best practice the sole one the Solr community > needs ? > I should have asked this earlier, still learning... > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multiple-indexes-cores-%28aka-solr-215%29-functional-value--tf3927076.html#a11325717 Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
