lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jacob Singh" <jacobsi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: collectionDistribution vs SolrReplication
Date Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:37:58 GMT
Has there been a discussion anywhere about a "binary log" style
replications scheme (ala mysql?)  Wherein, every write request goes to
the master, and the the slaves read in a queue of the requests and
update themselves one record at a time instead of wholesale?  Or is
this just not worth the development time?

Best,
Jacob

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्
<noble.paul@gmail.com> wrote:
> The default IndexDeletionPolicy just keeps the last commit only
> (KeepOnlyLastCommitDeletionPolicy) .Files belonging to older commits
> are removed. If the files are needed longer for replication, they are
> leased . The lease is extended 10 secs at a time. Once all the slaves
> have copied the lease is never extended and the files will be purged.
>
> In the snapshot based system , unless the snapshots are deleted from
> the file system the old files will continue to live on the disk
> --Noble
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Noble Paul ??????? ?????? wrote:
>>>
>>> * SolrReplication does not create snapshots . So you have less cleanup
>>> to do. The script based replication results is more disk space
>>> consumption (especially if you do frequent commits)
>>>
>>
>> Doesn't SolrReplication effectively take a snapshot by using a custom
>> IndexDeletionPolicy to keep the right index files around? Isn't that
>> maintaining a snapshot?
>>
>> Could you elaborate on the difference Noble?
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --Noble Paul
>



-- 

+1 510 277-0891 (o)
+91 9999 33 7458 (m)

web: http://pajamadesign.com

Skype: pajamadesign
Yahoo: jacobsingh
AIM: jacobsingh
gTalk: jacobsingh@gmail.com
Mime
View raw message