The suggestion to use “managed” and maybe “self-managed” is an interesting one. Do you think it’s possible some might confuse that with the other ways we use managed - like the “managed-schema”, and “managed resources” (synonyms and stop words)? Neither of those are cluster-specific, and I wonder if the overlap in terminology would cause them to be conflated.
Cassandra On Aug 6, 2020, 10:51 AM -0500, Ilan Ginzburg <[email protected]>, wrote: > Both "legacy" and "SolrCloud" clusters are search server clusters. Seen from > far enough, they look the same. > > In "legacy" the management code is elsewhere (developed by the client > operating the cluster, running on other machines using a diferent logic and > potentially another DB than Zookeeper) whereas in "SolrCloud" the management > code is embedded in the search server(s) code and it happens that (currently) > this code relies on Zookeeper. > > I see SolrCloud as a "managed cluster" vs. legacy that would be "Self > managed" by the client, or "U manage" (non managed when looking at it from > the Solr codebase perspective). > > Same idea as coordinated vs uncoordinated basically. I don't know why but I > prefer "managed". > > Ilan > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:49 PM Cassandra Targett <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > On Aug 6, 2020, 10:22 AM -0500, Gus Heck <[email protected]>, wrote: > > > > WRT the name "uncoordinated mode" I fear it could be read (or even > > > > become known as) as "clumsy mode" which is humorous but possibly not > > > > what we're going for :) > > > > > > I had also considered “non-coordinated”, and prefer it but couldn’t > > > articulate why. The association of “uncoordinated" with clumsiness might > > > be what was bugging me. > > > > I'd perhaps suggest Cluster mode for SolrCloud though I'm not entirely > > > > sure if Legacy Solr (in curren parlance) is not a "cluster" too, > > > > cluster being a somewhat vague term. However Clustered Mode and Legacy > > > > Mode seem more on target. I think "Legacy" could be changed since we're > > > > not really planning on abandoning it (are we?), but > > > > > > One can have a cluster and not run SolrCloud. I think from an operations > > > perspective, several servers all running Solr is considered a cluster, no > > > matter what tools are being used to get them to talk to each other. > > > > > > I think “Legacy” (also used today already in some contexts) is > > > problematic because there aren’t plans to abandon it. Also “Legacy > > > replication” is pretty close to exactly what PULL replicas use to poll > > > leaders and pull new index segments when needed. IOW, it’s not “legacy”, > > > it’s very actively being used in a growing number of clusters. That might > > > be an implementation detail users aren’t aware of, but I feel the term is > > > really lacking mostly in that it just doesn’t say anything besides “it’s > > > older”. > > > > the adjective there SHOULD communicate reduced functionality because > > > > there are plenty of features that are cloud (cluster) only. > > > > > > In my view, the reduced functionality of non-SolrCloud clusters is mostly > > > around coordination of requests, leader election, configs, and other > > > similar automated activities one does manually otherwise. So, I feel that > > > sort of proves my point - a word that conveys lack of coordination is a > > > good option for what it’s called. If there is a better antonym for > > > “coordinated”, I’m all for considering it but haven’t yet been able to > > > think of/find one. > > > > > > I think it’s important to think about what differentiates the two ways of > > > managing a Solr cluster and derive the naming from that. What features of > > > SolrCloud don’t exist in the non-SolrCloud approach? What words help us > > > generalize those gaps and can any of them be an appropriate name? > > > > > > > > -Gus > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:27 AM Cassandra Targett > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The work in SOLR-14702 has left us with some awkward phrasing (which > > > > > is still better than what it was) around non-SolrCloud clusters that > > > > > I've offered to help fix. > > > > > > > > > > I think we've struggled for years to find a good name for > > > > > non-SolrCloud clusters and we've used a number of variations: "legacy > > > > > replication" (which it isn't, since PULL replicas use the same > > > > > thing), "Standalone mode" (which it isn't because it's a cluster), > > > > > now "leader/follower mode" (which could be confusing because > > > > > SolrCloud has leaders). > > > > > > > > > > Yesterday I thought about what really differentiates a SolrCloud > > > > > cluster and a non-SolrCloud cluster and it occurred to me that a key > > > > > difference is the former is coordinated by ZooKeeper, while the > > > > > latter is not. That led me to think that perhaps "coordinated mode" > > > > > can someday be a better replacement for the term "SolrCloud", while > > > > > "uncoordinated mode" could be a replacement today for all these other > > > > > non-SolrCloud mode variations. > > > > > > > > > > I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14716 and will > > > > > create a branch for work in progress, but before I forge too far > > > > > ahead, I want to draw attention to it first to give a chance for > > > > > discussion so we're in agreement. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Cassandra > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) > > > > http://www.the111shift.com (play)
