Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B66049183 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 19:38:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 49682 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jun 2012 19:38:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 49614 invoked by uid 500); 10 Jun 2012 19:38:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 49605 invoked by uid 99); 10 Jun 2012 19:38:30 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 19:38:30 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of solr@elyograg.org designates 166.70.79.219 as permitted sender) Received: from [166.70.79.219] (HELO frodo.elyograg.org) (166.70.79.219) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 19:38:25 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frodo.elyograg.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C2D5165 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 13:38:03 -0600 (MDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=elyograg.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :references:subject:subject:mime-version:user-agent:from:from :date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mail; t=1339357083; bh=0MkNFXi7jnMzjN/qqKp6gATwxcbWCzGCv+j/L4elmWk=; b=mJwpHoZ/VWF8 zLmgbIROTIoVzjavIhhJ1NRfGPj1tR3PwhcimHfa+vcuUOHmAzjdl2ieFtuAVyO2 LzLHO2YR3pLQXUs/fUHjr/FiWirV8TvDLTbGH6dNLLAiVCtDtp1MNwBw7XPo3Fyl 2qpgmWBsdkWVn3eRIg6VPDtM3umn8Ao= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at frodo.elyograg.org Received: from frodo.elyograg.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (frodo.elyograg.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id uGMOBnY3SMox for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 13:38:03 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (100.int.elyograg.org [192.168.1.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: elyograg@elyograg.org) by frodo.elyograg.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11E4450E9 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 13:38:03 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4FD4F79D.4010707@elyograg.org> Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 13:38:05 -0600 From: Shawn Heisey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: SolrJ and Solr on different java versions References: <4FD478C2.8070804@elyograg.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 6/10/2012 5:59 AM, Robert Muir wrote: > There is a text file explaining this: JRE_VERSION_MIGRATION.txt > > here is a link to the one from the latest nightly build: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/JRE_VERSION_MIGRATION.html I've seen that already. That tells me that I should not run code that creates the index (index analyzers) and code that searches the index (query analyzers) on different Java versions. Both of these activities take place within Solr itself, there is no discussion of the SolrJ client. Currently my SolrJ indexing code just grabs data from MySQL (utf8), assigns it to the correct type of Java primitive or object, and passes it in an update request. There is no text manipulation. Even if I add such manipulation in the future, I would imagine that it will only be string splitting on delimiters within the ASCII character set. When I actually do the upgrade on Solr, I will reindex. There is no replication; the indexing code knows about both distributed indexes and operates on them independently. My concern is about SolrJ being on one java version while Solr is on another. The SolrJ indexing code will probably be upgraded to Java 7 first. As that code normally runs on the first Solr chain A server (corosync/pacemaker prefers that server, but can run it on any Solr server), Solr chain A would get upgraded (and reindexed) at the same time. This is the first mismatch - the SolrJ indexing code would be running on Java 7, index chain B would be running on Java 6. Assuming no failures, my haproxy load balancer can keep chain A in a backup role until such time as the website (SolrJ queries) is upgraded, after which I would upgrade chain B. It would be nice if I could get chain B upgraded before the website, since I think the website will take the longest to get through QA. The website is a tomcat cluster that I don't administer. If it's possible to upgrade those servers one at a time, I imagine that it will be done that way. Do you anticipate any problems with that java upgrade sequence? Thanks, Shawn --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org