lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jack Krupansky <>
Subject Re: Mix Solr 4 and 5?
Date Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:20:06 GMT
To be clear, having separate Solr servers on different versions should
definitely not be a problem. The only potential difficulty here is the
SolrJ vs. server back-compat issue.

-- Jack Krupansky

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:57 AM, <>

> Shawn wrote:
> >
> > If you are NOT running SolrCloud, then that should work with no problem.
> > The HTTP API is fairly static and has not seen any major upheaval
> recently.
> > If you're NOT running SolrCloud, you may even be able to replace the
> > SolrJ jar in your existing system with the 5.4.1 version (and update
> > SolrJ's dependent jars) and have everything continue to work.
> >
> > If you ARE running SolrCloud, I would not try mixing 4.x and 5.x,
> > in either direction.  SolrCloud is evolving very quickly ... I wouldn't
> > even mix *minor* versions, much less *major* versions.
> > There are differences in how the zookeeper database is laid out,
> > and mixing versions is not guaranteed to work, especially if SolrJ
> > is older than Solr.  If the version difference is small and SolrJ is
> newer
> > than Solr, there's a chance of success, but with the situation you
> > have described, SolrCloud would likely not work.
> When you talk about not mixing 4.x and 5.x when using SolrCloud, you mean
> between the client and the server that talk to each other, right? Or would
> it be a problem keeping our existing non cloud solr 4.x server, upgrading
> the client solrj jar to 5.x (assuming this works, like you and others here
> seem to think it should/could), and then adding a new solr cloud 5.x
> server? That way, there the two separate communication "channels" are solrj
> 5.x <--> solr 4.x server, and, solrj 5.x  <--> solrcloud 5.x.
> Or does the mere presense of a solr 4.x server and a solr cloud 5.x server
> on the same network cause problems, even when they don't know about
> eachother?
> Regards
> /Jimi

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