you can certainly save one hop by sending the update request to the shard leader (how are you sending things BTW, SolrJ?).
But at this point that hasn't been done, see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3154 It's certainly on the roadmap, but for now it works functionally so there are other first to fry.... FWIW, Erick On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Bill Au <bill.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do updates always start at the shard leader first? If so one can save one > internal request by only sending updates to the shard leader. I am > assuming that when the shard leader is down, SolrJ's CloudSolrServer is > smart enough to use the newly elected shard leader after a failover has > occurred. Am I correct? > > Bill > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe < > tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If you are going to use SolrJ, CloudSolrServer is even better than a >> round-robin load balancer for indexing, because it will send the documents >> straight to the shard leader (you save one internal request). If not, >> round-robin should be fine. >> >> Tomás >> >> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Bill Au <bill.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I am thinking of using a load balancer for both indexing and querying to >> > spread both the indexing and querying load across all the machines. >> > >> > Bill >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe < >> > tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > You should still use some kind of load balancer for searches, unless >> you >> > > use the CloudSolrServer (SolrJ) which includes the load balancing. >> > > Tomás >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Erick Erickson < >> > erickerick...@gmail.com >> > > >wrote: >> > > >> > > > Yes, I think SolrCloud makes sense with a single shard for exactly >> > > > this reason, NRT and multiple replicas. I don't know how you'd get >> NRT >> > > > on multiple machines without it. >> > > > >> > > > But do be aware of: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3971 >> > > > "A collection that is created with numShards=1 turns into a >> > > > numShards=2 collection after starting up a second core and not >> > > > specifying numShards." >> > > > >> > > > Erick >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Bill Au <bill.w...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > > > > I am currently using one master with multiple slaves so I do have >> > high >> > > > > availability for searching now. >> > > > > >> > > > > My index does fit on a single machine and a single query does not >> > take >> > > > too >> > > > > long to execute. But I do want to take advantage of high >> > availability >> > > of >> > > > > indexing and real time replication. So it looks like I can set up >> > > > > SolrCloud with only 1 shard (ie numShards=1). >> > > > > >> > > > > In this case is SolrCloud still using distributed search behind the >> > > > > screen? Will MoreLikeThis work? >> > > > > >> > > > > Does using SolrCloud with only 1 shard make any sense at all? >> > > > > >> > > > > Bill >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe < >> > > > > tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> It also provides high availability for indexing and searching. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Bill Au <bill.w...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > So I guess one would use SolrCloud for the same reasons as >> > > distributed >> > > > >> > search: >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > When an index becomes too large to fit on a single system, or >> > when a >> > > > >> single >> > > > >> > query takes too long to execute. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Bill >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Shawn Heisey < >> s...@elyograg.org> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > On 10/25/2012 1:29 PM, Bill Au wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > >> Is SolrCloud using distributed search behind the scene? Does >> > it >> > > > have >> > > > >> > the >> > > > >> > >> same limitations (for example, doesn't support MoreLikeThis) >> > > > >> distributed >> > > > >> > >> search has? >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Yes and yes. >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >>
