and replicationFactor is the number of copies of your data, not the number of servers marked 'replica'. So as has been said, if you have one leader, and three replicas, your replicationFactor will be 4.
Upayavira On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 03:29 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Ravi: > > Sameer is correct on how to get it done in one go. > > Don't get too hung up on replicationFactor. You can always > ADDREPLICA after the collection is created if you need to. > > Best, > Erick > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Sameer Maggon > <sam...@measuredsearch.com> wrote: > > I just gave an example API call, but for your scenario, the > > replicationFactor will be 4 (replicationFactor=4). In this way, all 4 > > machines will have the same copy of the data and you can put an LB in front > > of those 4 machines. > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Ravi Solr <ravis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> OK...I understood numShards=1, when you say replicationFactor=2 what does > >> it mean ? I have 4 machines, then, only 3 copies of data (1 at leader and 2 > >> replicas) ?? so am i not under utilizing one machine ? > >> > >> I was more thinking in the lines of a Mesh connectivity format i.e. > >> everybody has others copy so that I can put all 4 machines behind a Load > >> Balancer...Is that a wrong way to look at it ? > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Ravi Kiran > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Sameer Maggon <sam...@measuredsearch.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > You'll have to say numShards=1 and replicationFactor=2. > >> > > >> > http:// > >> > > >> > > >> [hostname]:8983/solr/admin/collections?action=CREATE&name=test&configName=test&numShards=1&replicationFactor=2 > >> > > >> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Ravi Solr <ravis...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thank you very much for responding Sameer so numShards=0 and > >> > > replicationFactr=4 if I have 4 machines ?? > >> > > > >> > > Thanks > >> > > > >> > > Ravi Kiran Bhaskar > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Sameer Maggon < > >> > sam...@measuredsearch.com > >> > > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Absolutely. You can have a collection with just replicas and no > >> shards > >> > > for > >> > > > redundancy and have a load balancer in front of it that removes the > >> > > > dependency on a single node. One of them will assume the role of a > >> > > leader, > >> > > > and in case that leader goes down, one of the replicas will be > >> elected > >> > > as a > >> > > > leader and your application will be fine. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Ravi Solr <ravis...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hello, > >> > > > > We are trying to move away from Master-Slave configuration > >> > to > >> > > a > >> > > > > SolrCloud environment. I have a couple of questions. Currently in > >> the > >> > > > > Master-Slave setup we have 4 Machines 2 of which are indexers and 2 > >> > of > >> > > > them > >> > > > > are query servers. The query servers are fronted via Load Balancer. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > There are 3 solr cores for 3 different/separate applications > >> > (mutually > >> > > > > exclusive). Each core is a complete index of all docs (i.e. the > >> data > >> > is > >> > > > not > >> > > > > sharded). > >> > > > > > >> > > > > We intend to keep it in a non-sharded mode even after the > >> > > SolrCloud > >> > > > > mode.The prime motivation to move to cloud is to effectively use > >> all > >> > > > > servers for indexing and querying (read fault tolerant/redundant). > >> > > > > > >> > > > > So, the real question is, can SolrCloud be used without shards ? > >> > i.e. a > >> > > > > "collection" resides entirely on one machine rather than > >> partitioning > >> > > > data > >> > > > > onto different machines ? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Ravi Kiran Bhaskar > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > *Sameer Maggon* > >> > > > Measured Search > >> > > > c: 310.344.7266 > >> > > > www.measuredsearch.com <http://measuredsearch.com> > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > *Sameer Maggon* > >> > Measured Search > >> > c: 310.344.7266 > >> > www.measuredsearch.com <http://measuredsearch.com> > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > *Sameer Maggon* > > Measured Search > > c: 310.344.7266 > > www.measuredsearch.com <http://measuredsearch.com>
