lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erick Erickson <>
Subject Re: Solr 6 managed-schema & version control
Date Wed, 27 Jul 2016 21:24:26 GMT
Using classic schema is perfectly acceptable/reasonable, you can
continue to do so freely (you'll have to change to
ClassicSchemaFactory though).

Also, you can freely edit managed-schema just as you did schema.xml.
The "trick" here is that you have to take some care _not_ to issue
commands that modify the schema or the in-memory version will
overwrite the one in ZK. Otherwise, though, you can freely use
managed-schema just as you do classic schema.

So you can do just what you do now, keep managed-schema in VCS and
upconfig it. Also note that Solr 6.2 has "bin/solr zk
upconfig/downconfig/cp/mv/ls" functionality.

Managed lends itself to some kind of UI that maintains it. The process
(IMO) for using that in prod would be something like:
> Use the UI to build your schema
> copy from ZK to your local machine
> put the configs in VCS
> Deploy using the VCS as your system-of-record.

But that's just my approach. If you don't want to use the
managed-schema features, switch back to classic IMO.


On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Rachid Bouacheria <> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I am upgrading from solr 4 to 6.
> In solr 4 I have a schema.xml that is under version control.
> But solr 6 has the notion of a managed schema that could be modified via a
> solr api call.
> This seems great and flexible, but my assumption is that in this case
> zookeeper becomes the authoritative copy and not SVN or Git.
> And this is where things become unclear to me.
> Is the expectation to download the configuration from zk the same way we do
> an svn checkout to have the configuration and run locally?
> How do we know who changed what and when?
> I know that there still is the option to use schema.xml by using
> the ClassicIndexSchemaFactory but I am curious to hear from y'all that use
> managed schema how you are doing it and if there are any downside, gotchas,
> or if all is just much better :-)
> Seems to me that running locally is harder as you cannot just checkout a
> project that contains the up to date schema.
> Thank you,
> Rachid.

View raw message