Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 49467 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2008 16:41:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Dec 2008 16:41:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 47607 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2008 16:41:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 47588 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2008 16:41:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 47577 invoked by uid 99); 2 Dec 2008 16:41:53 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:41:53 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:40:24 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1L7YJC-0002ga-Le for users@jackrabbit.apache.org; Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:41:10 -0800 Message-ID: <20794421.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 08:41:10 -0800 (PST) From: majohnst To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: Re: Clustering and Index update In-Reply-To: <20794419.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: matt@lattaoutdoors.com References: <20794419.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I meant to add that if I delete the index directory of node2 and then restart tomcat, the index is rebuilt and I can search for my:node correctly in node2. So this is probably an issue of node1 alerting node2 of changes. majohnst wrote: > > I have jackrabbit setup with a cluster of 2 nodes. Both nodes are running > on my local computer but through different tomcat webapps. The clustering > seems to be working correctly. My problem is when I try to search through > the nodes. > > If I add a new jcr node to cluster node1, the node is added correctly and > I can immediately search and find that node. But if I try to do the same > node on cluster node2, I get no results. If I browse the contents of > node2, I see my new node exists on the cluster. So somehow node2 is not > indexing the new changes. > > Ex. > - create new node, my:node and add to cluster node1 > - search for //element(*,my:node) on node1 and I get the new node > - search for //element(*,my:node) on node2 and I get no results > > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Clustering-and-Index-update-tp20794419p20794421.html Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.