Hi Chris, The core node numbers should be cleared out when the collection is deleted. Is that something you see consistently ?
P.S: I just tried creating a collection with 1 shard and 200 replicas and saw the core node numbers as expected. On deleting and recreating the collection, I saw that the counter was reset. Just to be clear, I tried this on master. -Anshum > On Jan 4, 2018, at 12:16 PM, Chris Ulicny <culicny@iq.media> wrote: > > Hi, > > In 7.1, how does solr determine the numbers that are assigned to the > replicas? I'm familiar with the earlier naming conventions from 6.3, but I > wanted to know if there was supposed to be any connection between the > "_n##" suffix and the number assigned to the "core_node##" name since they > don't seem to follow the old convention. As an example node from > clusterstatus for a testcollection with replication factor 2. > > "core_node91":{ > "core":"testcollection_shard22_replica_n84", > "base_url":"http://host:8080/solr", > "node_name":"host:8080_solr", > "state":"active", > "type":"NRT", > "leader":"true"} > > Along the same lines, when creating the testcollection with 200 shards and > replication factor of 2, I am also getting nodes that have negative numbers > assigned to them which looks a lot like an int overflow issue. From the > cluster status: > > "shard157":{ > "range":"47ae0000-48f4ffff", > "state":"active", > "replicas":{ > "core_node1675945628":{ > "core":"testcollection _shard157_replica_n-1174535610", > "base_url":"http://host1:8080/solr", > "node_name":"host1:8080_solr", > "state":"active", > "type":"NRT"}, > "core_node1642259614":{ > "core":"testcollection _shard157_replica_n-1208090040", > "base_url":"http://host2:8080/solr", > "node_name":"host2:8080_solr", > "state":"active", > "type":"NRT", > "leader":"true"}}} > > This keeps happening even when the collection is successfully deleted (no > directories or files left on disk), the entire cluster is shutdown, and the > zookeeper chroot path cleared out of all content. The only thing that > happened prior to this cycle was a single failed collection creation which > seemed to clean itself up properly, after which everything was shutdown and > cleaned from zookeeper as well. > > Is there something else that is keeping track of those values that wasn't > cleared out? Or is this now the expected behavior for the numerical > assignments to replicas? > > Thanks, > Chris
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP