As I understand it, any node in the cluster will direct the document to the leader for the appropriate shard.
Works for us. wunder Walter Underwood wun...@wunderwood.org http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > On Sep 19, 2017, at 9:59 AM, David Hastings <hastings.recurs...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Thanks! Going to have to throw up another solr 6.x instance for testing > again. Solr cloud will maintain index integrity across the nodes if > indexed to just one node correct? > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Walter Underwood <wun...@wunderwood.org> > wrote: > >> Yes, good old HTTP. >> >> wunder >> Walter Underwood >> wun...@wunderwood.org >> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) >> >> >>> On Sep 19, 2017, at 9:54 AM, David Hastings < >> hastings.recurs...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Do you use HttpSolrClient then? >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Walter Underwood < >> wun...@wunderwood.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> We run SolrJ 4.7.1 with Solr 6.5.1 (16 node cloud). No problems. >>>> >>>> We do not use the cloud-specific client and I’m pretty sure that we >> don’t >>>> use ConcurrentUpdateSolrServer. The latter is because it doesn’t report >>>> errors properly. >>>> >>>> We do our indexing through the load balancer and let the Solr Cloud >>>> cluster get the right docs to the right shards. That runs at 1 million >>>> docs/minute, so it isn’t worth doing anything fancier. >>>> >>>> wunder >>>> Walter Underwood >>>> wun...@wunderwood.org >>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Sep 19, 2017, at 9:05 AM, David Hastings < >>>> hastings.recurs...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What about the ConcurrentUpdateSolrServer for solrj? That is what >> almost >>>>> all of my indexing code is using for solr 5.x, Its been a while since I >>>>> experimented with upgrading but i seem to remember having to go >>>>> to HttpSolrClient and couldnt get the code to compile, so i tabled the >>>>> experiment for a while. eventually I will need to move to solr 6, but >>>> if i >>>>> could keep the same indexing code that would be ideal >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Erick Erickson < >>>> erickerick...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Felix: >>>>>> >>>>>> There's no specific testing that I know of for this issue, it's "best >>>>>> effort". Which means it _should_ work but I can't make promises. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now that said, underlying it all is just HTTP requests going back and >>>>>> forth so I know of no a-priori reasons it wouldn't be fine. It's just >>>>>> "try it and see" though. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> Erick >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm probably preaching to the choir, but Java 1.7 is two years past >>>>>> the end of support from Oracle, somebody sometime has to deal with >>>>>> upgrading. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Felix Stanley >>>>>> <felixstan...@globalsources.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi there, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We are planning to use SOLR J 5.5.4 to query from SOLR 6.5. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The reason was that we have to rely on JDK 1.7 at the client and as >> far >>>>>> as I >>>>>>> know SOLR J 6.x.x only support JDK 1.8. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I understood that SOLR J generally maintains backwards/forward >>>>>> compatibility >>>>>>> from this article: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/Solrj >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would there though be any exception that we need to take caution of >> for >>>>>> this >>>>>>> specific version? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks a lot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Felix Stanley >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ---------------------- >>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential >> and/or >>>>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or have >>>>>> received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender immediately >> and >>>>>> delete this e-mail (including any attachments) from your computer, and >>>> you >>>>>> must not use, disclose to anyone else or copy this e-mail (including >> any >>>>>> attachments), whether in whole or in part. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This e-mail and any reply to it may be monitored for security, legal, >>>>>> regulatory compliance and/or other appropriate reasons. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
