[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       solr-user
Subject:    RE: Solr | cluster | behaviour
From:       Prateek Jain J <prateek.j.jain () ericsson ! com>
Date:       2017-03-29 16:10:22
Message-ID: VI1PR07MB169645FB72AF40D874DCF8A3B3350 () VI1PR07MB1696 ! eurprd07 ! prod ! outlook ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Thanks Shawn. 

Regards,
Prateek Jain

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Heisey [mailto:apache@elyograg.org] 
Sent: 29 March 2017 01:27 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Solr | cluster | behaviour

On 3/29/2017 3:21 AM, Prateek Jain J wrote:
> We are having solr deployment in active passive mode. So, ideally only 
> one instance should be up and running at a time. That's true we only 
> see one instance serving requests but we do see some activity in CPU 
> for the standby solr instance. These instances are writing to shared 
> disk. My question is, why do we see activity is standby solr even if 
> it is not serving any requests. Is there any replication of in-memory 
> indexes between these instances? Any pointers to this are welcome.

Solr is not designed to work in this way.  Sharing an index directory between two \
instances is not recommended and may cause serious issues.  Each instance expects \
exclusive access to every index it is managing.  You can disable the locking that \
normally prevents such sharing, but that locking exists for a reason and should not \
be disabled.

Instead, you should use either SolrCloud's inherent index duplication technology, or \
the old master-slave replication that existed before SolrCloud.  Disks are cheap.  \
Taking risks with your data isn't.

Thanks,
Shawn


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]