Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
I tried the multi-core route and it gets too complicated and cumbersome to maintain. That is just from my own personal testing...It was suggested that each user have their own ID in a single index that you can query against accordingly. In the example schema.xml I believe there is a field called texttight or something like that that is meant for skew numbers. Give each user their own guid or md5 hash and add that as part of all your queries. That way, only their data are returned. It would be the equivalent of something like this... SELECT * FROM mytable WHERE userid = '3F2504E04F8911D39A0C0305E82C3301' AND Grant Ingersoll gave a presentation at the Lucene Revolution conference that demonstrated that you can build a query to be as easy or as complicated as any SQL statement. Maybe he can share that PPT? Adam On Feb 9, 2011, at 2:47 PM, Sujit Pal wrote: > Another option (assuming the case where a user can be granted access to > a certain class of documents, and more than one user would be able to > access certain documents) would be to store the access filter (as an OR > query of content types) in an external cache (perhaps a database or an > eternal cache that the database changes are published to periodically), > then using this access filter as a facet on the base query. > > -sujit > > On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:38 -0500, Glen Newton wrote: >>> This application will be built to serve many users >> >> If this means that you have thousands of users, 1000s of VMs and/or >> 1000s of cores is not going to scale. >> >> Have an ID in the index for each user, and filter using it. >> Then they can see only their own documents. >> >> Assuming that you are building an app that through which they >> authenticate & talks to solr . >> (i.e. all requests are filtered using their ID) >> >> -Glen >> >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Greg Georges >> wrote: >>> From what I understand about multicore, each of the indexes are independant >>> from each other right? Or would one index have access to the info of the >>> other? My requirement is like you mention, a client has access only to his >>> or her search data based in their documents. Other clients have no access >>> to the index of other clients. >>> >>> Greg >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com] >>> Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28 >>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr >>> >>> What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for >>> each client? >>> If there's no data sharing across clients, then using the same solr >>> server/index doesn't seem necessary. >>> >>> Solr will easily meet your needs though, its the best there is. >>> >>> On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:23 -0500, Greg Georges wrote: >>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> I am looking into an enterprise search solution for our architecture and I >>>> am very pleased to see all the features Solr provides. In our case, we >>>> will have a need for a highly scalable application for multiple clients. >>>> This application will be built to serve many users who each will have a >>>> client account. Each client will have a multitude of documents to index >>>> (0-1000s of documents). After discussion we were talking about going >>>> multicore and to have one index file per client account. The reason for >>>> this is that security is achieved by having a separate index for each >>>> client etc.. Is this the best approach? How feasible is it (dynamically >>>> create indexes on client account creation. Is it better to go the faceted >>>> search capabilities route? Thanks for your help >>>> >>>> Greg >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >
Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
Another option (assuming the case where a user can be granted access to a certain class of documents, and more than one user would be able to access certain documents) would be to store the access filter (as an OR query of content types) in an external cache (perhaps a database or an eternal cache that the database changes are published to periodically), then using this access filter as a facet on the base query. -sujit On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:38 -0500, Glen Newton wrote: > > This application will be built to serve many users > > If this means that you have thousands of users, 1000s of VMs and/or > 1000s of cores is not going to scale. > > Have an ID in the index for each user, and filter using it. > Then they can see only their own documents. > > Assuming that you are building an app that through which they > authenticate & talks to solr . > (i.e. all requests are filtered using their ID) > > -Glen > > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Greg Georges wrote: > > From what I understand about multicore, each of the indexes are independant > > from each other right? Or would one index have access to the info of the > > other? My requirement is like you mention, a client has access only to his > > or her search data based in their documents. Other clients have no access > > to the index of other clients. > > > > Greg > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com] > > Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28 > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr > > > > What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for > > each client? > > If there's no data sharing across clients, then using the same solr > > server/index doesn't seem necessary. > > > > Solr will easily meet your needs though, its the best there is. > > > > On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:23 -0500, Greg Georges wrote: > > > >> Hello all, > >> > >> I am looking into an enterprise search solution for our architecture and I > >> am very pleased to see all the features Solr provides. In our case, we > >> will have a need for a highly scalable application for multiple clients. > >> This application will be built to serve many users who each will have a > >> client account. Each client will have a multitude of documents to index > >> (0-1000s of documents). After discussion we were talking about going > >> multicore and to have one index file per client account. The reason for > >> this is that security is achieved by having a separate index for each > >> client etc.. Is this the best approach? How feasible is it (dynamically > >> create indexes on client account creation. Is it better to go the faceted > >> search capabilities route? Thanks for your help > >> > >> Greg > > > > > > > > >
Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
> This application will be built to serve many users If this means that you have thousands of users, 1000s of VMs and/or 1000s of cores is not going to scale. Have an ID in the index for each user, and filter using it. Then they can see only their own documents. Assuming that you are building an app that through which they authenticate & talks to solr . (i.e. all requests are filtered using their ID) -Glen On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Greg Georges wrote: > From what I understand about multicore, each of the indexes are independant > from each other right? Or would one index have access to the info of the > other? My requirement is like you mention, a client has access only to his or > her search data based in their documents. Other clients have no access to the > index of other clients. > > Greg > > -Original Message- > From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com] > Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28 > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr > > What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for > each client? > If there's no data sharing across clients, then using the same solr > server/index doesn't seem necessary. > > Solr will easily meet your needs though, its the best there is. > > On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:23 -0500, Greg Georges wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> I am looking into an enterprise search solution for our architecture and I >> am very pleased to see all the features Solr provides. In our case, we will >> have a need for a highly scalable application for multiple clients. This >> application will be built to serve many users who each will have a client >> account. Each client will have a multitude of documents to index (0-1000s of >> documents). After discussion we were talking about going multicore and to >> have one index file per client account. The reason for this is that security >> is achieved by having a separate index for each client etc.. Is this the >> best approach? How feasible is it (dynamically create indexes on client >> account creation. Is it better to go the faceted search capabilities route? >> Thanks for your help >> >> Greg > > > -- -
RE: Architecture decisions with Solr
From what I understand about multicore, each of the indexes are independant from each other right? Or would one index have access to the info of the other? My requirement is like you mention, a client has access only to his or her search data based in their documents. Other clients have no access to the index of other clients. Greg -Original Message- From: Darren Govoni [mailto:dar...@ontrenet.com] Sent: 9 février 2011 14:28 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Architecture decisions with Solr What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for each client? If there's no data sharing across clients, then using the same solr server/index doesn't seem necessary. Solr will easily meet your needs though, its the best there is. On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:23 -0500, Greg Georges wrote: > Hello all, > > I am looking into an enterprise search solution for our architecture and I am > very pleased to see all the features Solr provides. In our case, we will have > a need for a highly scalable application for multiple clients. This > application will be built to serve many users who each will have a client > account. Each client will have a multitude of documents to index (0-1000s of > documents). After discussion we were talking about going multicore and to > have one index file per client account. The reason for this is that security > is achieved by having a separate index for each client etc.. Is this the best > approach? How feasible is it (dynamically create indexes on client account > creation. Is it better to go the faceted search capabilities route? Thanks > for your help > > Greg
Re: Architecture decisions with Solr
What about standing up a VM (search appliance that you would make) for each client? If there's no data sharing across clients, then using the same solr server/index doesn't seem necessary. Solr will easily meet your needs though, its the best there is. On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 14:23 -0500, Greg Georges wrote: > Hello all, > > I am looking into an enterprise search solution for our architecture and I am > very pleased to see all the features Solr provides. In our case, we will have > a need for a highly scalable application for multiple clients. This > application will be built to serve many users who each will have a client > account. Each client will have a multitude of documents to index (0-1000s of > documents). After discussion we were talking about going multicore and to > have one index file per client account. The reason for this is that security > is achieved by having a separate index for each client etc.. Is this the best > approach? How feasible is it (dynamically create indexes on client account > creation. Is it better to go the faceted search capabilities route? Thanks > for your help > > Greg
Architecture decisions with Solr
Hello all, I am looking into an enterprise search solution for our architecture and I am very pleased to see all the features Solr provides. In our case, we will have a need for a highly scalable application for multiple clients. This application will be built to serve many users who each will have a client account. Each client will have a multitude of documents to index (0-1000s of documents). After discussion we were talking about going multicore and to have one index file per client account. The reason for this is that security is achieved by having a separate index for each client etc.. Is this the best approach? How feasible is it (dynamically create indexes on client account creation. Is it better to go the faceted search capabilities route? Thanks for your help Greg
