lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noble Paul <noble.p...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Is "solrconfig.xml" a potentially misleading filename?
Date Fri, 10 Jul 2015 18:14:53 GMT
A GUI is just one of the multiple interfaces through which a user may
interact with Solr. The API is more important.

We are starting to move Solr from a config file based system to an API
based system where all that you wish to change in a system is
accessible through the API (I am talking about the config/schema API).
Building a UI is not necessarily important.

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Erick Erickson
<erickerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
> So it just occurred to me to ask why stop with renaming? We're going
> around the loop again of "wouldn't it be nice to edit the configs from
> a GUI". Or "a collections like API to manage configs on Zookeeper".
> That got me to wondering if XML is really doing us any favors at this
> point. NOTE: To even suggest this I must be smoking something, but
> would another format avoid that problem? I freely admit I have no
> clue, but...
>
> Whether it's even possible or not to express what we do in the configs
> in, say, JSON I don't know. And whether JSON (or whatever) would avoid
> the security issues I also don't know. My gut feel is that it's a
> massive amount of work and nobody in their right mind would tackle it,
> the rewards are too small for the effort. But I wanted to throw it out
> there.
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> Then make it accept two names, and start shipping examples with the new
>> name. Old stuff works, new stuff makes sense.
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015, at 08:47 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>>
>> It is the wrong name - mostly because it came from a single core solution.
>> We could change it, but you have to pretty carefully consider how heavily
>> it's embedded out there now.
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:20 PM Shawn Heisey <apache@elyograg.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/9/2015 10:55 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
>>> coreconfig.xml has it's own problems in SolrCloud,
>>> collectionconfig seems better. Except in that case
>>> stand-alone Solr doesn't really use collections...
>>>
>>> Siiggghhh.
>>
>> I debated with myself on whether I even wanted to bring this up.
>> Ultimately I decided it would be interesting to discuss, even if we
>> don't take any action.
>>
>> As potential replacements for solrconfig.xml, I find that core.xml or
>> possibly just config.xml are the most appealing ... but the former might
>> be confusing in a SolrCloud context.  I'm biased towards cores, because
>> the Solr indexes that I interact with most often are NOT using
>> SolrCloud, and might never use it.  I've heard rumblings about SolrCloud
>> becoming the *only* running mode, but that hasn't happened so far.
>>
>> I understand how we got where we are today -- in the early days, Solr
>> only handled one index, so the solrconfig.xml actually did configure all
>> of Solr.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shawn
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Mark
>> about.me/markrmiller
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------
Noble Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message