On the other hand, I'm aware of the fact that if I go with Lucene approach, failover is something that I will have to support manually! which is a nightmare!
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Alireza Salimi <alireza.sal...@gmail.com>wrote: > This solution makes sense, but I still don't know if I can use solrCloud > with > this configuration or not. > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Robert Stewart <bstewart...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Split up index into say 100 cores, and then route each search to a >> specific core by some mod operator on the user id: >> >> core_number = userid % num_cores >> >> core_name = "core"+core_number >> >> That way each index core is relatively small (maybe 100 million docs or >> less). >> >> >> On Mar 9, 2012, at 2:02 PM, Glen Newton wrote: >> >> > millions of cores will not work... >> > ...yet. >> > >> > -glen >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Lan <dung....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Solr has no limitation on the number of cores. It's limited by your >> hardware, >> >> inodes and how many files you could keep open. >> >> >> >> I think even if you went the Lucene route you would run into same >> hardware >> >> limits. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> View this message in context: >> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Lucene-vs-Solr-design-decision-tp3813457p3813511.html >> >> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > - >> > http://zzzoot.blogspot.com/ >> > - >> >> > > > -- > Alireza Salimi > Java EE Developer > > > -- Alireza Salimi Java EE Developer
