[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17256?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17885197#comment-17885197
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-17256:
-------------------------------------
Do we assume that the lambda doesn't need to really return anything? Should
the lambda actually be a SolrRequest? If a SolrRequest, then method returns
whatever SolrRequest's response type is.
I hate the ThreadLocal but it's an implementation detail that could be
eliminated with more work.
It's unclear we need to bother with non-Http2SolrClients but could do so if
someone puts in the time.
> Remove SolrRequest.getBasePath setBasePath
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-17256
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17256
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: SolrJ
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: newdev, pull-request-available
> Time Spent: 1h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> SolrRequest has a getBasePath & setBasePath. The naming is poor; it's the
> URL base to the Solr node like "http://localhost:8983/solr";. It's only
> recognized by HttpSolrClient; LBSolrClient (used by CloudSolrClient) ignores
> it and will in fact mutate the passed in request to its liking, which is
> rather ugly because it means a request cannot be used concurrently if the
> user wants to. But moreover I think there's a conceptual discordance of
> placing this concept on SolrRequest given that some clients want to route
> requests to nodes *they* choose. I propose removing this from SolrRequest
> and instead adding a method specific to HttpSolrClient. Almost all existing
> usages of setBasePath immediately execute the request on an HttpSolrClient,
> so should be easy to change.
--
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
