: Even though the example solrconfig.xml documents what this parameter means
: for LogMP and TieredMP. I think if users want to meddle with merge
: settings, it is not uber-expert if we ask them to specify which MP they
: want to use, and then use that MP's specific parameters. To make it easier

Agreed -- the <mergeFactor/> tag exists because of backcompat -- we should 
absolutely move away from using it explicitly in sample configs and docs, 
and instead encourage people to declare a <mergePolicy/> and then use the 
appropriate settings nested inside it for the policy they pick ... 
users really should not be picking <mergeFactor> in a vacume.

: on users, we can support a class="Tiered/LogMergePolicy" so users don't
: have to define the full class name (maybe we prefix that with
: "lucene.Tiered/LogMP"), but once it's defined, they need to use the right
: parameters for the chosen MP.

I don't like the road this idea is headed down ... this would basically 
introduce a *third* was to declare a mergePolicy, and introduce all the 
fun and exciting error checking / warning / logging involved in dealing 
with what happens if people mix and match bits and pieces of all three.  
My vote would be to go the other direction: fail hard in 5.0 if a 
<mergeFactor/> tag is found.

We have a robust system in place for allowing users to configure arbitrary 
mergePolicies -- we should use that system moving forward and improve the 
docs as needed if folks are concerned that making the jump from "simple 
sample configs w/o a merge policy configured" to "i want to adjust the 
merge settings, how do i do that" is currently too complicated.

: reference guide, but I think it's more important that we document the
: default MergePolicy and some important settings about it (e.g.
: maxMergedSegmentMB, maxMergeAtOnce and segmentsPerTier).

+1 



-Hoss
http://www.lucidworks.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to