lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jason rutherglen <>
Subject Re: To cluster, or not to cluster...
Date Fri, 24 Mar 2006 19:39:23 GMT
No because the data would be on the slave servers which would continue to server data.  You
could easily have mirrored master machines if you were worried about losing updates.  Updates
of a specific division or stripe would occur to both mirrored servers or not at all.  Or fancier
configurations could be done such as if a master fails, take it out and recopy the entire
index from the good master.  

----- Original Message ----
From: Robert Haycock <>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:26:58 AM
Subject: RE: To cluster, or not to cluster...

Hi Jason,

Would that not mean if one of the master indexes went down then a subset
of data would be offline?


-----Original Message-----
From: jason rutherglen [] 
Sent: 24 March 2006 18:32
Subject: Re: To cluster, or not to cluster...

It should be possible to do clustering if you divide your master index
over multiple master servers.  Then write a wrapper around the
SolrClient API using something like MultiSearcher.  From what I know
this would work, could be wrong.

----- Original Message ----
From: Clay Webster <>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:54:45 AM
Subject: Re: To cluster, or not to cluster...

On 3/24/06, Robert Haycock <> wrote:
> Is it/will it be possible to cluster solr?
> We have a distributed system and it would be nice if we could
> the index to improve performance.
Solr does not have replication.  But it does have a very nice index
distribution system.

Solr can be run in a master/slave setup.  The master receives all the
changes.  For each commit a snapshooter index can be made.  The slaves
run the snappuller with whatever polling frequency they like.  Each
is then snapinstalled in the slave and can have its cache warmed (while
serving queries from the older index).

Slaves can come on line with new indexes out of sync.  But if your slave
hardware is the same and your pulling and shooting well-understood, and
make warming time-based it probably will not be a problem.  This
distribution is noted by each slave in the master.  That's as tied
as they get (not much).  So, if you have a requirement that they must
all be
in index-version-sync you could tie them closer and extend Solr.


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