We need to draw a sharp distinction between standalone “going away”
in terms of our internal code and going away in terms of the user
experience.
Usually when we’re talking about standalone going a way, it’s the
former. The assumption is that we’ll use an embedded ZK that
fires up automatically so Solr behaves very similarly to how it
behaves in the current standalone mode just without all the
if (zkHost == null) do_something else do_something_else
I wonder it the slickest way to use embedded ZK would be to
populate the embedded ZK during core discovery
Erick
> On Jun 28, 2020, at 6:40 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Cost of maintaining feature parity across the two modes is an overhead.
> Security plugins, package manager (that doesn't work in standalone), UI,
> etc. Our codebase is littered with checks to ascertain if we're zkAware.
> There are massive benefits to maintainability if standalone mode were to go
> away. Of course, provided all usecases that could be solved using
> standalone can also be solved using SolrCloud. At that point, I'd love for
> us to get rid of the term "SolrCloud".
>
> On Sun, 28 Jun, 2020, 3:59 pm Ishan Chattopadhyaya, <
> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would like to know under which situations (except for the various bugs
>> that will be fixed eventually) would a SolrCloud solution not suffice.
>> AFAICT, pull replicas and tlog replicas can provide similar replication
>> strategies commonly used with standalone Solr. I understand that running ZK
>> is an overhead and SolrCloud isn't best written when it comes to handling
>> ZK, but that can be improved.
>>
>> And for those users who just want a single node Solr, they can just start
>> Solr with embedded ZK. It won't practically make difference.
>>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun, 2020, 3:45 pm Ilan Ginzburg, <ilans...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I disagree Ishan. We shouldn't get rid of standalone mode.
>>> I see three layers in Solr:
>>>
>>> 1. Lucene (the actual search libraries)
>>> 2. The server infra ("standalone Solr" basically)
>>> 3. Cluster management (SolrCloud)
>>>
>>> There's value in using lower layers without higher ones.
>>> SolrCloud is a good solution for some use cases but there are others that
>>> need a search server and for which SolrCloud is not a good fit and will
>>> likely never be. If standalone mode is no longer available, such use cases
>>> will have to turn to something other than Solr (or fork and go their own
>>> way).
>>>
>>> Ilan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 9:39 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>>> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rather than getting rid of the terminology, we should get rid of the
>>>> standalone mode Solr altogether. I totally understand that SolrCloud is
>>>> broken in many ways today, but we should attempt to fix it and have it
>>> as
>>>> the only mode in Solr.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 24 Jun, 2020, 8:17 pm Mike Drob, <md...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Brend,
>>>>>
>>>>> I appreciate that you are trying to examine this issue from multiple
>>>> sides
>>>>> and consider future implications, but I don’t think that is a stirring
>>>>> argument. By analogy, if we are out of eggs and my wife asks me to go
>>> to
>>>>> the store to get some, refusing to do so on the basis that she might
>>> call
>>>>> me while I’m there and also ask me to get milk would not be
>>> reasonable.
>>>>>
>>>>> What will come next may be an interesting question philosophically,
>>> but
>>>> we
>>>>> are not discussing abstract concepts here. There is a concrete issue
>>>>> identified, and we’re soliciting input in how best to address it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for the suggestion of "guide/follower"
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 6:30 AM Bernd Fehling <
>>>>> bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm following this thread now for a while and I can understand
>>>>>> the wish to change some naming/wording/speech in one or the other
>>>>>> programs but I always get back to the one question:
>>>>>> "Is it the weapon which kills people or the hand controlled by
>>>>>> the mind which fires the weapon?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The thread started with slave - slavery, then turned over to master
>>>>>> and followed by leader (for me as a german... you know).
>>>>>> What will come next?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And more over, we now discuss about changes in the source code and
>>>>>> due to this there need to be changes to the documentation.
>>>>>> What about the books people wrote about this programs and source
>>> code,
>>>>>> should we force this authors to rewrite their books?
>>>>>> May be we should file a request to all web search engines to reject
>>>>>> all stored content about these "banned" words?
>>>>>> And contact all web hosters about providing bad content.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To sum things up, within my 40 years of computer science and writing
>>>>>> programs I have never had a nanosecond any thoughts about words
>>>>>> like master, slave, leader, ... other than thinking about computers
>>>>>> and programming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just my 2 cents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For what it is worth, I tend to guide/follower if there "must be"
>>> any
>>>>>> changes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bernd
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
