[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-567?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12628613#action_12628613
]
Jason Rutherglen commented on SOLR-567:
---
Without looking at the code, what has changed?
MultiCore.java is renamed to CoreContainer
and SolrCore is changed a lot
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[
I would like to have a higher level discussion about the integration
before mucking about in the SOLR code again. This way work invested
is work that will not have to be changed too much later on. Do folks
have ideas about how they would want to do this?
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Noble
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-567?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12628624#action_12628624
]
Noble Paul commented on SOLR-567:
-
As a general approach , A pluggable SolrCore does not look
Ocean integration should really be targeted at solr 2 I think, so API
compatibility shouldn't be a large barrier.
Noble Paul (JIRA) wrote:
[
Ok, SOLR 2 can be a from the ground up rewrite? That would make
things much easier. Otherwise Noble you are correct the integration
from my perspective is messy and there would be a lot of things that
are currently in SOLR that are unnecessary.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Mark Miller [EMAIL
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Jason Rutherglen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, SOLR 2 can be a from the ground up rewrite?
Sort-of... I think that's up for discussion at this point, but enough
should change that keeping Java APIs back compatible is not a priority
(just my opinion of course).
Postponing Ocean Integration towards 2.0 is not a good idea. First of
all we do not know when 2.0 is going to happen. delaying such a good
feature till 2.0 is wasting time.
My assumption was that Actually realtime search may have nothing to do
with the core itself . It may be fine with a
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ्
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If with a few changes we can start the integration, that is
the best way forward.
That's a good point too... I think collecting all the requirements for
Solr2 will help from a design perspective, but if people
IMO, you are underestimating the difficulty of integrating Ocean with
Solr's current API's.
Also, Jason has already mentioned that Ocean is much more than just
realtime search. Adding realtime search to something like solr 1.5 is a
different goal than possibly integrating the Ocean work that
Ok... Well I did try that. I think that can be done as well. IMO
schemas should be avoided with realtime. Otherwise there is a
nightmare with schema versions. The current config files would not be
used. How do you propose the non-integration of those things? It
would seem to create a strange
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Mark Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO, you are underestimating the difficulty of integrating Ocean with Solr's
current API's.
OK. you are right. Actually ,I did not mean the ocean integration. I
am mostly interested in the Realtime search part. If we take one
That may be the way to go, however there are many issues that you will
probably run into, the same ones I ran into that made the integration
difficult as mentioned. I could be wrong however. Most realtime
search is something on the order of a 5-10 second delay and there is
no transaction log. I
These all sound like good ideas for solr2. The ability to handle changes
on the fly easily across many machines would be an awesome place to
reach. Dynamically changing field schema/stopword stuff is also a great
feature to have.
I think the key to reaching those goals is to really join the
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:59 PM, Mark Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These all sound like good ideas for solr2. The ability to handle changes on
the fly easily across many machines would be an awesome place to reach.
Dynamically changing field schema/stopword stuff is also a great feature to
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cloud computing cluster having hundreds of servers is a niche area
limited to few (and they already have their systems in place without Solr).
Any efforts of integration must keep in mind our users and their needs.
Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cloud computing cluster having hundreds of servers is a niche area
limited to few (and they already have their systems in place without Solr).
Any efforts of integration must keep in mind our
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We all scratch our own itch in open-source... good, practical
scalability to high levels is an interest of mine :-)
Many will choose their solution based on it's ability to scale to
their most optimistic projections... so
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-567?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12628541#action_12628541
]
Noble Paul commented on SOLR-567:
-
The code has changed drastically since the last patch is
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-567?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12597776#action_12597776
]
Otis Gospodnetic commented on SOLR-567:
---
Jason, if you keep the same name for the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-567?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12595406#action_12595406
]
Ryan McKinley commented on SOLR-567:
I take it this is related to SOLR-564? (oceansearch
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-567?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12595408#action_12595408
]
Jason Rutherglen commented on SOLR-567:
---
I figured someone on the core team should
22 matches
Mail list logo
