Yes, my original question is about search.  And Mark did answered is in his
original reply.  I am guessing that the replicas are updated sequentially
so the newly added documents will be available in some replicas before
other.  I want to know where SolrCloud stands in terms of CAP.

Bill


On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Otis Gospodnetic <
otis.gospodne...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think Bill was asking about search....
> I think the Q is whether the query hitting the shard where a doc was sent
> for indexing would see that doc even before that doc has been copied to
> replicas.
>
> I didn't test it, but I'd think the answer would be positive because of the
> xa log.
>
> Otis
> --
> Performance Monitoring - http://sematext.com/spm
> On Nov 15, 2012 11:30 AM, "Mark Miller" <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It depends - no commit necessary for realtime get. Otherwise, yes, you
> > would need to do at least a soft commit. That works the same way though -
> > so if you make your update, then do a soft commit, you can be sure your
> > next search will see the update on all the replicas. And with realtime
> get,
> > of course no commit is necessary to see it.
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> > On Nov 15, 2012, at 10:40 AM, David Smiley (@MITRE.org) <
> dsmi...@mitre.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Mark Miller-3 wrote
> > >> I'm talking about an update request. So if you make an update, when it
> > >> returns, your next search will see the update, because it will be on
> > >> all replicas.
> > >
> > > I presume this is only the case if (of course) the client also sent a
> > > commit.  So you're saying the commit call will not return unless all
> > > replicas have completed their commits.  Right?
> > >
> > > ~ David
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----
> > > Author:
> > http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
> > > --
> > > View this message in context:
> >
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/consistency-in-SolrCloud-replication-tp4020379p4020518.html
> > > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to