[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17860511#comment-17860511
]
Jason Gerlowski commented on SOLR-17351:
----------------------------------------
The big question, before we change this API, is whether the change needs to be
backwards compatible.
Technically at least, I think the answer is "no". All of our v2 APIs,
including this filestore API, are currently marked as experimental, which was
done intentionally to enable us to evolve them more freely. But these
filestore APIs seem like a bit of an exception in that they have no v1
equivalent. It's one thing to treat an API as experimental when there's a more
stable alternative to point users towards. But without that, making breaking
changes feels a little inconsiderate.
My vote is that we make at least some concession to backcompat:
- introduce updated, more REST-ful versions of these APIs in 9.7, alongside
the versions that exist today
- remove the older versions of the API in 10.0
- Solr's internal usage of these APIs would continue to use the older
versions in 9.x releases, but switch to using the newer versions with 10.0
Any objections to that approach?
> Cosmetic changes to v2 filestore "get file" API
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-17351
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17351
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Package Manager, v2 API
> Affects Versions: 9.6.1
> Reporter: Jason Gerlowski
> Priority: Minor
>
> Solr's filestore APIs fit well with the REST-ful design we're targeting with
> our v2 APIs, with one large exception: the "get file" API current available
> at {{GET /api/node/files/somePath.txt}}. This API stands out for a few
> reasons:
> 1. It uses a different path-prefix than all other filestore APIs. (i.e.
> {{/api/node/files}} instead of {{/api/cluster/files}})
> 2. It exposes 4 or 5 conceptually distinct operations. Obviously in the
> "default" case it allows callers to retrieve filestore contents, but based on
> query params it can instead:
> - return filestore entry metadata (when {{meta=true}} is specified)
> - instruct the receiving Solr node to pull a file from another node's
> filestore and cache it locally (when {{getFrom=someOtherNode}} is specified)
> - instruct the receiving Solr node to push its cached copy of a file out to
> all other Solr nodes (when {{sync=true}} is specified)
> 3. Even in the default case of returning "raw" filestore contents, the API
> can provide two different styles of response:
> - if {{wt=json}} is specified Solr will take the filestore entry bytes,
> attempt to stringify them, and then return a JSON object that uses this
> string as the value for a "response" key. It's unclear how this would work
> for binary content
> - for all other values of "wt", the API will return the raw file content.
> We should reconsider this endpoint and see if it can't be massaged into being
> more in line with our other v2 APIs. Some cosmetic tweaks will go a long
> way, but the biggest benefit is likely to come from breaking the endpoint up
> into multiple distinct APIs. In its current form, the API returns such a
> variety of responses that it's hard to write client code for. (I suspect
> this is the main reason these "filestore" APIs were never made available in
> SolrJ.)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@solr.apache.org
