On 12/4/2015 6:37 AM, Gian Maria Ricci - aka Alkampfer wrote: > Many thanks for your response. > > I worked with Solr until early version 4.0, then switched to ElasticSearch > for a variety of reasons. I've used replication in the past with SolR, but > with Elasticsearch basically I had no problem because it works similar to > SolrCloud by default and with almost zero configuration. > > Now I've a customer that want to use Solr, and he want the simplest possible > stuff to maintain in production. Since most of the work will be done by Data > Import Handler, having multiple parallel and independent machines is easy to > maintain. If one machine fails, it is enough to configure another machine, > configure core and restart DIH. > > I'd like to know if other people went through this path in the past.
Even though I don't use SolrCloud myself for my primary indexes, if I were setting up a brand new install of Solr for someone else to manage after I'm finished with it, I would use SolrCloud. SolrCloud has no master, no single point of failure. Handling multiple shards and multiple replicas is mostly automatic. If the clients use SolrJ, there's no need for a load balancer. I've never used elasticsearch, but I've looked a little bit at its configuration. There are aspects of it that are much easier than Solr. Solr does not hide very much of the lower-level complexity from the administrator. This makes the learning curve for Solr a lot steeper than the learning curve for ES, but once that is tackled, the Solr administrator understands the inner workings a lot better than the ES administrator. I've seen claims that ES is much faster than Solr ... but if the benchmarks supporting those claims are using the out-of-the-box configurations, then it is an unfair comparison -- Solr's out of the box configuration has much more capability turned on and is going to run slower as a result. I have not seen any numbers where Solr and ES are set up with configurations that are as identical as possible. I have to wonder if this is because the performance would be similar. Thanks, Shawn
