+1 to us making the package management adhere to immutable deployments.
I'll start work on that soon.

On Wed, 17 Nov, 2021, 3:56 am David Smiley, <[email protected]> wrote:

> SOLR-13553 was reverted; SOLR-14404 is what replaced it; shipped in 8.6.
> The issue I refer to above SOLR-15782 links to the latter as a new way to
> register these plugins in solr.xml instead of having to do so at-runtime.
> Plugging in at runtime is neat but let's not discount the value / benefits
> of configuration that can be tested/deployed immutably / statically --
> immutable infrastructure (
> https://www.bmc.com/blogs/immutable-infrastructure/ ).  I think that we'd
> be further along in adoption of the plugin system if it had 1st class
> support for this -- static first, runtime later.  I raised a thread earlier
> about this notion relating to some other configuration we have --
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/3vvld3xnndtthtl7sfgdbsgkbtpm55b0
>
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 12:10 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I was referring to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13553.
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Nov, 2021, 10:38 pm Ishan Chattopadhyaya, <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Those new @endpoint ones are the ones that are loadable via packages
>>> (node/cluster level plugins), right? IIRC, there's a Zookeeper handler that
>>> Noble introduced that way. I feel we should put our weight behind it so
>>> that we can (at some point in time) decouple such handlers from solr-core
>>> module and plugin at runtime.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Nov, 2021, 8:34 pm David Smiley, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm looking in CoreContainer and it appears we have two fundamentally
>>>> different ways of implementing node level handlers/endpoints/APIs (whatever
>>>> you might want to call them) to respond to requests.  There is the original
>>>> SolrRequestHandler interface, which certainly isn't going away, at least
>>>> for use in a core.  It has decent javadocs and it refers to the SolrCore a
>>>> lot strongly suggesting they are only associated at a core level (which I
>>>> know not to be true; it's used for many CoreContainer APIs).  And it
>>>> appears there are now @EndPoint annotated methods on classes that needn't
>>>> implement anything.  It has no javadocs :disappointed: although admittedly
>>>> it's fairly intuitive.  I suppose new functionality at the CoreContainer
>>>> level should never be the old SolrRequestHandler way?  If true; it would be
>>>> good to deprecate it w/ comments.
>>>>
>>>> Some context: I'm working with Nazerke to make it so that you can
>>>> register these in solr.xml SOLR-15782 and it's not evident if we should use
>>>> <requestHandler .../> terminology to mimic that in solrconfig.xml
>>>> (familiarity with developers) or to use something else.  Maybe we could
>>>> detect at runtime if the class is a SolrRequestHandler vs something
>>>> annotated with @EndPoint?  I don't know.  Perhaps
>>>> SolrRequestHandler.handleRequest should itself be labelled with @EndPoint.
>>>>
>>>> ~ David Smiley
>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>>
>>>

Reply via email to