[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-255?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12504740
]
Otis Gospodnetic commented on SOLR-255:
---------------------------------------
I took only a very quick look at this and noticed changes are done in Lucene.
Any such changes should be brought up on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list and
posted as a patch in Lucene's JIRA. You can explain why you need to make those
changes.
I didn't take a closer look at your Solr changes, but from your description
above, my guess is that this will clash, at least somewhat, with SOLR-215.
Is this what you implemented?
remote lucene index (not
Solr?)
/
RMI
client -----> solr instance /
\
RMI
\
remote lucene index (not
Solr?)
Thanks.
> RemoteSearchable for Solr(use RMI)
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-255
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-255
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: search
> Reporter: Toru Matsuzawa
> Attachments: solr-multi20070606.zip
>
>
> I experimentally implemented RemoteSearchable of Lucene for Solr.
> I referred to "FederatedSearch" and used RMI.
> Two or more Searchers can be referred to with SolrIndexSearcher.
> These query-only indexes can be specified in solrconfig.xml,
> enumerating the list under a <searchIndex> tag.
> <searchIndex>
> <lst>E:\sample\data1</lst>
> <lst>E:\sample\data2</lst>
> <lst>rmi://localhost</lst>
> </searchIndex>
> The index in the dataDir is also used as the default index of solr
> to update and query.
> When data of a document in a index specified under the <searchIndex> is
> updated,
> that document data in the index will be deleted and data of the updated
> document will be stored
> in the index in the dataDir.
> SolrRemoteSearchable (the searcher for remote access) is started from
> SolrCore
> by specifying "< remoteSearcher>true</remoteSearcher >" in solrconfig.xml.(It
> is registered in RMI. )
> ("-Djava.security.policy" should be set when you start VM. )
> Not all of the operational cases are tested
> because Solr has so many features.
> Moreover, TestUnit has not been made
> because I made this through a trial and error process.
> Some changes are required in Lucene to execute this.
> I need your comments on this although it might be hard without TestUnit.
> I especially worry about the followings:
> - Am I on the right truck about this issue?
> - Is the extent of modifying Lucene tolerable?
> - Are there any ideas to implement this feature without modifying Lucene?
> - Does this idea contribute for improving Solr?
> - This implementation may partially overlap with "Multiple Solr Cores".
> What should be done?
> - Are there any other considerations about this issue, which I have
> overlooked?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
