But my concern is this, when we have just 2 servers: - I want 1 to be able to take over in case the other fails, as you point out. - But when *both* servers are up I don't want the SolrCloud load balancer to have Shard1 and Replica2 do the work (as they would both reside on the same physical server).
Does that make sense? I want *both* server1 & server2 sharing the processing of every request, *and* I want the failover capability. I'm probably missing some bit of logic here, but I want to be sure I understand the architecture. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:otis.gospodne...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:13 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: SolrCloud loadbalancing, replication, and failover Correct. This is what you want if server 2 goes down. Otis Solr & ElasticSearch Support http://sematext.com/ On Apr 18, 2013 3:11 AM, "David Parks" <davidpark...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Step 1: distribute processing > > We have 2 servers in which we'll run 2 SolrCloud instances on. > > We'll define 2 shards so that both servers are busy for each request > (improving response time of the request). > > > > Step 2: Failover > > We would now like to ensure that if either of the servers goes down > (we're very unlucky with disks), that the other will be able to take > over automatically. > > So we define 2 shards with a replication factor of 2. > > > > So we have: > > . Server 1: Shard 1, Replica 2 > > . Server 2: Shard 2, Replica 1 > > > > Question: > > But in SolrCloud, replicas are active right? So isn't it now possible > that the load balancer will have Server 1 process *both* parts of a > request, after all, it has both shards due to the replication, right? > >
