Hello,
Pardon me if this has been already answered somewhere and I
apologize for a lengthy post. I was wondering if anybody could help me
understand Replication internals a bit more. We have a single
master-slave setup (solr 1.4.1) with the configurations as shown
below. Our environment is
heckerFile
2.7G search-data
Thanks,
Ravi Kiran Bhaskar
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Bill Bell wrote:
> I did not see answers... I am not an authority, but will tell you what I
> think
>
> Did you get some answers?
>
>
> On 5/6/11 2:52 PM, "Ravi Solr" wr
Hello All,
I am planning to upgrade from Solr 1.4.1 to Solr 3.1. I
saw some deprecation warnings in the log as shown below
[#|2011-05-09T12:37:18.762-0400|WARNING|sun-appserver9.1|org.apache.solr.analysis.BaseTokenStreamFactory|_ThreadID=53;_ThreadName=httpSSLWorkerThread-9001-13
;_Re
Thanks Grijesh for responding. I meant that I will use the Lucene 3.1
jars for indexing also from now on. My current index already has a
million docs indexed with solr 1.4.1 version, I read somewhere that
once server is upgraded to 3.1, it is said that the first commit will
change the indexes to 3.
Hello Mr. Kanarsky,
Thank you very much for the detailed explanation,
probably the best explanation I found regarding replication. Just to
be sure, I wanted to test solr 3.1 to see if it alleviates the
problems...I dont think it helped. The master index version and
generation are gr
Hoss,
Thank you very much for clearly delineating the difference.
Just to be clear - My intent to move to 3.1 was driven by my desire to
improve my replication performance - Deducing from your explanation, I
believe the replication/indexing related changes/bug fixes like the
following will
uments, then committing),
> You will cycle through all 10 segments pretty fast.
>
> It appears that if you do go past the 10 segments without replicating, the
> only recourse is for the replicator to do a full index replication instead
> of a delta index replication...
>
> Does th
eneration is greater than slave, try to watch for the index on
> both master and slave the same time to see what files are getting
> replicated. You probably may need to adjust your merge factor, as Bill
> mentioned.
>
> -Alexander
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 12:45 -0400,
tell me how you solved it.
Ravi Kiran Bhaskar
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Ravi Solr wrote:
> Thank you Mr. Bell and Mr. Kanarsky, as per your advise we have moved
> from 1.4.1 to 3.1 and have made several changes to configuration. The
> configuration changes have worked nicely til
ex folder on master and slave
> before and after the replication?
>
> -Alexander
>
>
> On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 18:34 -0400, Ravi Solr wrote:
>> Sorry guys spoke too soon I guess. The replication still remains very
>> slow even after upgrading to 3.1 and setting the compr
If you have multi-word synonyms you could use -
tokenizerFactory="solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory" - in the
SynonymFilterFactory filter factory declaration. This assumes that
your tokenizer for that field allows for keeping the phrases as a
single token (achieved by using solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory
If you have multi-word synonyms you could use -
tokenizerFactory="solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory" - in the
SynonymFilterFactory filter factory declaration. This assumes that
your tokenizer for that field allows for keeping the phrases as a
single token (achieved by using solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory
12 matches
Mail list logo
