lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Walter Underwood <wun...@wunderwood.org>
Subject Re: 99.9% uptime requirement
Date Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:57:15 GMT
Right. You don't get to 99.9% by assuming that an 8 hour outage is OK.  
Design for continuous uptime, with plans for how long it takes to  
patch around a single point of failure. For example, if your load  
balancer is a single point of failure, make sure that you can redirect  
the front end servers to a single Solr server in much less than 8 hours.

Also, think about your SLA. Can the search index be more than 8 hours  
stale? How quickly do you need to be able to replace a failed indexing  
server? You might be able to run indexing locally on each search  
server if they are lightly loaded.

wunder

On Aug 4, 2009, at 7:11 AM, Norberto Meijome wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:15:44 -0700
> "Robert Petersen" <robertpe@buy.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks all, I figured there would be more talk about daemontools if  
>> there
>> were really a need.  I appreciate the input and for starters we'll  
>> put two
>> slaves behind a load balancer and grow it from there.
>>
>
> Robert,
> not taking away from daemon tools, but daemon tools won't help you  
> if your
> whole server goes down.
>
> don't put all your eggs in one basket - several
> servers, load balancer (hardware load balancers x 2, haproxy, etc)
>
> and sure, use daemon tools to keep your services running within each  
> server...
>
> B
> _________________________
> {Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
>
> "Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address  
> on it?"
>  Mark Twain
>
> I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery  
> when wet.
> Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You  
> have been
> Warned.
>


Mime
View raw message