On 11/28/2014 2:44 AM, rajadilipchowdary.ko...@cognizant.com wrote: > We are using Apache Solr 1.4.1 for our project. Now a days we are facing many > problems regarding solr indexing, so when we saw website we found latest > version is 4.10, could you please help us in Upgrading the Solr. > > Is there any specific things which we need to change from our current setup
Solr 1.4.1 is extremely solid software, despite the fact that it was released over four years ago. There are very few bugs in it, though it is missing a lot of functionality and performance that can be found in newer versions. We would recommend upgrading, but unless you give us details about the problems you are having, we won't know for sure whether upgrading will solve those problems. The other two replies you received talked about starting with the 4.10.2 example config/schema and customizing that until you achieve a config that meets your needs. That's excellent advice ... you should listen to it. I would strongly recommend reindexing from scratch. Verion 4.x will not be able to read indexes from Solr 1.4.1 at all, and if you take the advice given earlier, your existing index may very well be incompatible with the new config/schema that you create. To use the existing index (assuming it's even compatible with the new config/schema), you would first have to upgrade to version 3.6.2, optimize the index, and then upgrade again. You'll get better results by starting with a blank index on the new version and reindexing. Many bugs in indexing have been fixed over the years. Without a reindex, you will not see the benefit of those bugfixes. http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToReindex Your last question, about specific things to change ... this is impossible to answer without seeing the existing setup ... and there have been so many changes that starting over with the 4.10.2 example (as already mentioned) is highly recommended. It's a fair amount of work to build a new config with such a major version jump, you'll meet resistance if you ask us to do it for you. Thanks, Shawn
