Are we saying it has to do something with stop and restarting replica's otherwise I haven't seen/heard any issues with document updates and forwarding to replica's...
Thanks, Susheel On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:58 PM Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > So this seems like it absolutely needs a JIRA.... > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:39 AM Kevin Risden <kris...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I pushed 3 branches that modifies test.sh to test 5.5, 6.6, and 7.5 > locally > > without docker. I still see the same behavior where the latest updates > > aren't on the replicas. I still don't know what is happening but it > happens > > without Docker :( > > > > > https://github.com/risdenk/test-solr-start-stop-replica-consistency/branches > > > > Kevin Risden > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:41 AM Kevin Risden <kris...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Erick - Yea thats a fair point. Would be interesting to see if this > fails > > > without Docker. > > > > > > Kevin Risden > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:06 AM Erick Erickson < > erickerick...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Kevin: > > >> > > >> You're also using Docker, right? Docker is not "officially" supported > > >> although there's some movement in that direction and if this is only > > >> reproducible in Docker than it's a clue where to look.... > > >> > > >> Erick > > >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 7:24 PM > > >> Kevin Risden > > >> <kris...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > I haven't dug into why this is happening but it definitely > reproduces. I > > >> > removed the local requirements (port mapping and such) from the > gist you > > >> > posted (very helpful). I confirmed this fails locally and on Travis > CI. > > >> > > > >> > https://github.com/risdenk/test-solr-start-stop-replica-consistency > > >> > > > >> > I don't even see the first update getting applied from num 10 -> 20. > > >> After > > >> > the first update there is no more change. > > >> > > > >> > Kevin Risden > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 8:26 PM Jeremy Smith <jas2...@cornell.edu> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Thanks Erick, this is 7.5.0. > > >> > > ________________________________ > > >> > > From: Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 8:20:18 PM > > >> > > To: solr-user > > >> > > Subject: Re: SolrCloud Replication Failure > > >> > > > > >> > > What version of solr? This code was pretty much rewriten in 7.3 > IIRC > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018, 10:47 Jeremy Smith <jas2...@cornell.edu > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi all, > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We are currently running a moderately large instance of > > >> standalone > > >> > > > solr and are preparing to switch to solr cloud to help us scale > > >> up. I > > >> > > have > > >> > > > been running a number of tests using docker locally and ran > into an > > >> issue > > >> > > > where replication is consistently failing. I have pared down > the > > >> test > > >> > > case > > >> > > > as minimally as I could. Here's a link for the > docker-compose.yml > > >> (I put > > >> > > > it in a directory called solrcloud_simple) and a script to run > the > > >> test: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://gist.github.com/smithje/2056209fc4a6fb3bcc8b44d0b7df3489 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Here's the basic idea behind the test: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 1) Create a cluster with 2 nodes (solr-1 and solr-2), 1 shard, > and 2 > > >> > > > replicas (each node gets a replica). Just use the default > schema, > > >> > > although > > >> > > > I've also tried our schema and got the same result. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 2) Shut down solr-2 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 3) Add 100 simple docs, just id and a field called num. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 4) Start solr-2 and check that it received the documents. It > did! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 5) Update a document, commit, and check that solr-2 received the > > >> update. > > >> > > > It did! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 6) Stop solr-2, update the same document, start solr-2, and make > > >> sure > > >> > > that > > >> > > > it received the update. It did! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 7) Repeat step 6 with a new value. This time solr-2 reverts > back > > >> to what > > >> > > > it had in step 5. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I believe the main issue comes from this in the logs: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > solr-2_1 | 2018-10-31 17:04:26.135 INFO > > >> > > > (recoveryExecutor-4-thread-1-processing-n:solr-2:8082_solr > > >> > > > x:test_shard1_replica_n2 c:test s:shard1 r:core_node4) [c:test > > >> s:shard1 > > >> > > > r:core_node4 x:test_shard1_replica_n2] o.a.s.u.PeerSync > PeerSync: > > >> > > > core=test_shard1_replica_n2 url=http://solr-2:8082/solr Our > > >> versions > > >> > > are > > >> > > > newer. ourHighThreshold=1615861330901729280 > > >> > > > otherLowThreshold=1615861314086764545 > ourHighest=1615861330901729280 > > >> > > > otherHighest=1615861335081353216 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > PeerSync thinks the versions on solr-2 are newer for some > reason, > > >> so it > > >> > > > doesn't try to sync from solr-1. In the final state, solr-2 > will > > >> always > > >> > > > have a lower version for the updated doc than solr-1. I've > tried > > >> this > > >> > > with > > >> > > > different commit strategies, both auto and manual, and it > doesn't > > >> seem to > > >> > > > make any difference. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Is this a bug with solr, an issue with using docker, or am I > just > > >> > > > expecting too much from solr? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Thanks for any insights you may have, > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Jeremy > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
