lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shalin Shekhar Mangar <shalinman...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: problem with replication/solrcloud - getting 'missing required field' during update intermittently (SOLR-6251)
Date Thu, 17 Jul 2014 04:40:59 GMT
Phew, thanks for tracking it down.


On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Nathan Neulinger <nneul@neulinger.org>
wrote:

> FYI. We finally tracked down the problem.... at least 99.9% sure at this
> point, and it was staring me in the face the whole time - just never
> noticed:
>
> [{"id":"4b2c4d09-31e2-4fe2-b767-3868efbdcda1","channel": {"add":
> "preet"},"channel": {"add": "adam"}}]
>
> Look at the JSON... It's trying to add two "channel" array elements...
> Should have been:
>
> [{"id":"4b2c4d09-31e2-4fe2-b767-3868efbdcda1","channel": {"add":
> "preet"}},
>  {"id":"4b2c4d09-31e2-4fe2-b767-3868efbdcda1","channel": {"add": "adam"}}]
>
> I half wonder how it chose to interpret that particular chunk of json, but
> either way, I think the origin of our issue is resolved.
>
>
> From what I'm reading on JSON - this isn't valid syntax at all. I'm
> guessing that SOLR doesn't actually validate the JSON, and it's parser is
> just creating something weird in that situation like a new request for a
> whole new document.
>
> -- Nathan
>
>
>
> On 07/15/2014 07:19 PM, Nathan Neulinger wrote:
>
>> Issue was closed in Jira requesting it be discussed here first. Looking
>> for any diagnostic assistance on this issue with
>> 4.8.0 since it is intermittent and occurs without warning.
>>
>> Setup is two nodes, with external zk ensemble. Nodes are accessed
>> round-robin on EC2 behind an ELB.
>>
>> Schema has:
>>
>> <schema name="hive" version="1.5">
>> ...
>>     <field name="timestamp" type="long" indexed="false" stored="true"
>> required="true" multiValued="false"
>> omitNorms="true" />
>> ...
>>
>>
>> Most of the updates are working without issue, but randomly we'll get the
>> above failure, even though searches before and
>> after the update clearly indicate that the document had the timestamp
>> field in it. The error occurs when the second node
>> does it's distrib operation against the first node.
>>
>> Diagnostic details are all in the jira issue. Can provide more as needed,
>> but would appreciate any suggestions on what
>> to try or to help diagnose this other than just trying to throw thousands
>> of requests at it in round-robin between the
>> two instances to see if it's possible to reproduce the issue.
>>
>> -- Nathan
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Nathan Neulinger                       nneul@neulinger.org
>> Neulinger Consulting                   (573) 612-1412
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Nathan Neulinger                       nneul@neulinger.org
> Neulinger Consulting                   (573) 612-1412
>



-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message