lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Replication not working
Date Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:09:19 GMT
You can't. But index restoration should be a very rare thing,
 or you have some lurking problem in your process.

Or this is an XY problem, what problem are you trying to
solve? see: http://people.apache.org/~hossman/#xyproblem

Best
Erick

On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Dean Pullen <dean.pullen@semantico.com> wrote:
> I can't understand, then, how we could ever restore and get replication to work without
manual intervention!
>
> Dean
>
> On 21 Dec 2011, at 16:37, Dean Pullen wrote:
>
>> I can't see a way, if the slave is on another server.
>>
>> We're going to upgrade solr - as you can delete the index after unloading a core
in this way:
>>
>> cores?action=UNLOAD&core=liveCore&deleteIndex=true
>>
>> From v3.3 (I think)
>>
>> On 21 Dec 2011, at 16:11, Dean Pullen wrote:
>>
>>> Thought as much, thanks for the reply.
>>>
>>> Is there an easy way of dropping the index on the slave, or do I have to manually
delta the index files?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Dean.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21 Dec 2011, at 15:54, Erick Erickson wrote:
>>>
>>>> You've probably hit it on the head. The slave version is greater than the
master
>>>> version, so replication isn't "necessary". BTW, the version starts
>>>> life as a timestamp,
>>>> but then is simply incremented on successive commits, which accounts for
>>>> what you are seeing.
>>>>
>>>> You should be able to blow the index away on the slave and wait for replication
>>>> and go from there.
>>>>
>>>> Another possibility: How much faith do you have in your slave index?
>>>> If it's all good,
>>>> you could simply copy *that* to the master manually and go from there.
>>>>
>>>> If you're rebuilding your entire index, just blow the master index
>>>> away, re-index from
>>>> scratch and that should work too (be sure to disable replication
>>>> during the rebuild
>>>> unless you want a partial index on the slave).
>>>>
>>>> Although copying the files *then* deciding not to use them doesn't seem like
>>>> a good thing. Not sure if 3.x has the same behavior or not...
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> Erick
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Dean Pullen <dean.pullen@semantico.com>
wrote:
>>>>> E.g. I see this in the slave logs:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,635  INFO handler.SnapPuller:265 - Master's version:
1271406570655, generation: 376
>>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,635  INFO handler.SnapPuller:266 - Slave's version:
1271406571565, generation: 1286
>>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,636  INFO handler.SnapPuller:267 - Starting replication
process
>>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:27,639  INFO handler.SnapPuller:270 - Number of files
in latest index in master: 9
>>>>> …
>>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:50,997  INFO handler.SnapPuller:286 - Total time taken
for download : 23 secs
>>>>> 2011-12-21 15:45:51,050  INFO handler.SnapPuller:586 - New index installed.
Updating index properties…
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet the index doesn't change!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 21 Dec 2011, at 15:37, Dean Pullen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have an odd problem locally when attempting replication with solr
1.4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is, though the master files get copied to a temp directory
in the slave data directory (I see this happen at runtime), they are then not copied over
the actual slave index data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We were wondering if it was due to the index version of the restored
master data being behind the slave index version after a restore? Any other ideas would be
appreciated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dean Pullen
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message