Other question, Can someone confirm that I can upgrade from 4.5.1 to 4.6 in a safety and clean way (without optimises and all stuff)?
-- Yago Riveiro Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig) On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Yago Riveiro wrote: > Shawn, > > This setup has big implication and I think that this problem is not describe > in proper way either wiki or ref.. guide and how can be overcame (all the > process that you describes). > > +1 to find a way to upgrade without reindexing the data, I have not space > enough to do an optimize of 3T and respective replicas (not to mention the > time it would take). > > -- > Yago Riveiro > Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig) > > > On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > > > On 11/19/2013 4:10 PM, yriveiro wrote: > > > After the reading this link about DocValues and be pointed by Mark Miller > > > to > > > raise the question on the mailing list, I have some questions about the > > > codec implementation note: > > > > > > "Note that only the default implementation is supported by future version > > > of > > > Lucene: if you try an alternative format, you may need to switch back to > > > the > > > default and rewrite your index (e.g. forceMerge) before upgrading." > > > > > > My questions is about how I can do this, either the wiki or the ref guide > > > don't explain how this process can be done. > > > > > > I'm using the per-field DocValues formats, therefore I'm not using the > > > default implementation, and this in some way this scare me, because I have > > > in some way the possibility of make Solr updates compromised. > > > > > > > > > The way I understand what you've been told is this: > > > > Remove all docValuesFormat attributes from your schema. Restart/Reload > > and optimize (forceMerge) your index. At this point you should be able > > to upgrade Solr without any problems. Once you're upgraded, re-add the > > docValuesFormat attributes and optimize again. > > > > Mark and other experts - is this correct? > > > > I do fully understand that your index is HUGE, so optimizing it is not > > trivial. > > > > IMHO upgrades should be possible with the disk-based format. Having very > > large indexes is the primary reason that people choose the disk-based > > format. These are the people who are least likely to be able to either > > reindex or run an optimize. > > > > Thanks, > > Shawn > > > > > > > >
