How can you store Solr shards in hadoop? Is each data node running a Solr 
server?  If so - is the reducer doing a trick to write to a local fs?

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 11, 2012, at 12:04 AM, "M. C. Srivas" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Interestingly, a few MapR customers have gone the other way, deliberately 
> having the indexer put  the Solr shards directly into MapR and letting it 
> distribute it. Has made index-management a cinch.
> 
> Otherwise they do run into what Tim alludes to.
> 
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Lance Norskog <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In the LucidWorks Big Data product, we handle this with a reducer that 
> > sends documents to a SolrCloud cluster. This way the index files are not 
> > managed by Hadoop.
> 
> Hi Lance,
> I'm curious if you've gotten that to work with a decent-sized (e.g. >
> 250 node) cluster?  Even a trivial cluster seems to crush SolrCloud
> from a few months ago at least...
> 
> Thanks,
> --tim
> 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > | From: "Ted Dunning" <[email protected]>
> > | To: [email protected]
> > | Cc: "Hadoop User" <[email protected]>
> > | Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 7:58:57 AM
> > | Subject: Re: Hadoop/Lucene + Solr architecture suggestions?
> > |
> > | I prefer to create indexes in the reducer personally.
> > |
> > | Also you can avoid the copies if you use an advanced hadoop-derived
> > | distro. Email me off list for details.
> > |
> > | Sent from my iPhone
> > |
> > | On Oct 9, 2012, at 7:47 PM, Mark Kerzner <[email protected]>
> > | wrote:
> > |
> > | > Hi,
> > | >
> > | > if I create a Lucene index in each mapper, locally, then copy them
> > | > to under /jobid/mapid1, /jodid/mapid2, and then in the reducers
> > | > copy them to some Solr machine (perhaps even merging), does such
> > | > architecture makes sense, to create a searchable index with
> > | > Hadoop?
> > | >
> > | > Are there links for similar architectures and questions?
> > | >
> > | > Thank you. Sincerely,
> > | > Mark
> > |
> 

Reply via email to