[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-303?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12528494 ]
Hoss Man commented on SOLR-303: ------------------------------- FWIW: I haven't really been able to follow this issue much (it's way out of my area of expertise) but seeing some comments go by in email i wanted to mention two things... > ResonseDocs are based on document unique key while DocList is based on > internal doc id. > The purpose of ResponseDocs is to represent documents lying in remote index > while DocList are > meant for local internal doc id. One thing to keep in mind is the way MultiReader deals with this in Lucene ... if you know the maxDoc of each of your sub-indexes, then you can compute internal docIds ... that may be one way to preserve the DocList abstraction (and allow for supporting schemas without uniqueKey fields) when dealing with federated search (allthough it may open up new problems if you need to rely on havingsome form of an identifier that doesn't change .. i'm not sure if the approach being taken makes multiple requests to the shards) That said... Federated Search is a complex enough concept that if it requires additions to the ResponseWriter API to be done effeciently, I don't think that would be the end of the world -- the key thing would be to find ways to minimize the impact on existing clients -- if things work for you now, they should keep working for you; if you want to start using federated search, then it's fair to expect that you may have to change a few things, or deal with a few limitations. Off hte top of my head: one option may be to add a FederatableResponseWriter subclass such that if a request is federated, then the writer being used must implement that interface or it's a runtime error. > Federated Search over HTTP > -------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-303 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-303 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: search > Reporter: Sharad Agarwal > Priority: Minor > Attachments: fedsearch.patch, fedsearch.patch, fedsearch.patch > > > Motivated by http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FederatedSearch > "Index view consistency between multiple requests" requirement is relaxed in > this implementation. > Does the federated search query side. Update not yet done. > Tries to achieve:- > ------------------------ > - The client applications are totally agnostic to federated search. The > federated search and merging of results are totally behind the scene in Solr > in request handler . Response format remains the same after merging of > results. > The response from individual shard is deserialized into SolrQueryResponse > object. The collection of SolrQueryResponse objects are merged to produce a > single SolrQueryResponse object. This enables to use the Response writers as > it is; or with minimal change. > - Efficient query processing with highlighting and fields getting generated > only for merged documents. The query is executed in 2 phases. First phase > gets the doc unique keys with sort criteria. Second phase brings all > requested fields and highlighting information. This saves lot of CPU in case > there are good number of shards and highlighting info is requested. > Should be easy to customize the query execution. For example: user can > specify to execute query in just 1 phase itself. (For some queries when > highlighting info is not required and number of fields requested are small; > this can be more efficient.) > - Ability to easily overwrite the default Federated capability by appropriate > plugins and request parameters. As federated search is performed by the > RequestHandler itself, multiple request handlers can easily be pre-configured > with different federated search settings in solrconfig.xml > - Global weight calculation is done by querying the terms' doc frequencies > from all shards. > - Federated search works on Http transport. So individual shard's VIP can be > queried. Load-balancing and Fail-over taken care by VIP as usual. > -Sub-searcher response parsing as a plugin interface. Different > implementation could be written based on JSON, xml SAX etc. Current one based > on XML DOM. > HOW: > ------- > A new RequestHandler called MultiSearchRequestHandler does the federated > search on multiple sub-searchers, (referred as "shards" going forward). It > extends the RequestHandlerBase. handleRequestBody method in > RequestHandlerBase has been divided into query building and execute methods. > This has been done to calculate global numDocs and docFreqs; and execute the > query efficiently on multiple shards. > All the "search" request handlers are expected to extend > MultiSearchRequestHandler class in order to enable federated capability for > the handler. StandardRequestHandler and DisMaxRequestHandler have been > changed to extend this class. > > The federated search kicks in if "shards" is present in the request > parameter. Otherwise search is performed as usual on the local index. eg. > shards=local,host1:port1,host2:port2 will search on the local index and 2 > remote indexes. The search response from all 3 shards are merged and serviced > back to the client. > The search request processing on the set of shards is performed as follows: > STEP 1: The query is built, terms are extracted. Global numDocs and docFreqs > are calculated by requesting all the shards and adding up numDocs and > docFreqs from each shard. > STEP 2: (FirstQueryPhase) All shards are queried. Global numDocs and docFreqs > are passed as request parameters. All document fields are NOT requested, only > document uniqFields and sort fields are requested. MoreLikeThis and > Highlighting information are NOT requested. > STEP 3: Responses from FirstQueryPhase are merged based on "sort", "start" > and "rows" params. Merged doc uniqField and sort fields are collected. Other > information like facet and debug is also merged. > STEP 4: (SecondQueryPhase) Merged doc uniqFields and sort fields are grouped > based on shards. All shards in the grouping are queried for the merged doc > uniqFields (from FirstQueryPhase), highlighting and moreLikeThis info. > STEP 5: Responses from all shards from SecondQueryPhase are merged. > STEP 6: Document fields , highlighting and moreLikeThis info from > SecondQueryPhase are merged into FirstQueryPhase response. > TODO: > -Support sort field other than default score > -Support ResponseDocs in writers other than XMLWriter > -Http connection timeouts > OPEN ISSUES; > -Merging of facets by "top n terms of field f" > Scope for Performance optimization:- > -Search shards in parallel threads > -Http connection Keep-Alive ? > -Cache global numDocs and docFreqs > -Cache Query objects in handlers ?? > Would appreciate feedback on my approach. I understand that there would be > lot things I might have over-looked. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.