Ian, others, As with many 'bugs' that have a workaround, this bug has been lying around for about a year now. We still have the problem that the cluster-nodes have different lucene indexes. At first, we thought this happened over time. Recently we made a copy of our production database and used it with 4 new cluster nodes (we cleared the journal table and the local revisions table, first). We started them all, completely clean, at which point all nodes started to build the lucene index. Without making any changes to the contents, we see different results for jackrabbit search queries on these 4 cluster nodes. So it seems the lucene indexes might differ more over time, but could differ right from the start.
Does anybody have a clue how this could happen? Are we missing something? TIA Dennis On 29-9-2010 12:37, Ian Boston wrote: > On 29 Sep 2010, at 11:33, Dennis van der Laan wrote: > >> From your reply I >> understand that this should not be the case with Lucene, is it? > > Every JournalRecord should have been replayed on every machine (at some time > later if the JVM was down). That *should* ensure that all documents are > indexed on all machines. > Sounds like this is not happening in your environment. > > Ian > -- Dennis van der Laan, MSc Centre for Information Technology University of Groningen
