[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5029?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13705250#comment-13705250
]
Erick Erickson commented on SOLR-5029:
--------------------------------------
Ryan:
Nope, didn't see that. I think the fixes aren't all that hard if we can agree
on what they _should_ be.
I see what you're trying to do in SOLR-5028, but I don't think that handles
Alan's persistence simplification. Of course that wasn't there until recently.
Which is pretty much what was behind the proposal to move it automagically for
4.x to a child of <solr>. But I'd like Alan to weigh in on it....
For that matter, I don't think the current checked-in code for persistence does
the right thing in both cases either.
Alan, how do you think we should reconcile all this?
> shardHandlerFactory is not properly persisted
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-5029
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5029
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Ryan Ernst
>
> In SOLR-5028 I discovered persistence for shardHandlerFactory is only looking
> for connTimeout and socketTimeout children. Persistence should work for any
> SHF impl, not just HttpShardHandlerFactory. I think the thing to do here is
> just copying the underlying Node to the new file, but the current persistence
> code assumes a flat (String->String) hierarchy (which seems wrong, flat
> hierarchy was one of the reasons myself and others were against
> solr.properties).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
