[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6630?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14184149#comment-14184149
]
Shawn Heisey commented on SOLR-6630:
------------------------------------
Followup -- the commandline tool "svn log" on Windows does show appropriate
history when doing both svn copy and svn rename. That means that the pre-patch
operation is much simpler than I described earlier -- just a single svn copy:
{noformat}
svn copy
solr/solrj/src/java/org/apache/solr/common/cloud/ImplicitDocRouter.java
solr/solrj/src/java/org/apache/solr/common/cloud/ManualDocRouter.java
{noformat}
> Deprecate the "implicit" router and rename to "manual"
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6630
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6630
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: SolrCloud
> Affects Versions: 4.10
> Reporter: Shawn Heisey
> Fix For: 5.0, Trunk
>
> Attachments: SOLR-6630.patch
>
>
> I had this exchange with an IRC user named "kindkid" this morning:
> {noformat}
> 08:30 < kindkid> I'm using sharding with the implicit router, but I'm seeing
> all my documents end up on just one of my 24 shards. What
> might be causing this? (4.10.0)
> 08:35 <@elyograg> kindkid: you used the implicit router. that means that
> documents will be indexed on the shard you sent them
> to, not
> routed elsewhere.
> 08:37 < kindkid> oh. wow. not sure where I got the idea, but I was under the
> impression that implicit router would use a hash of the
> uniqueKey modulo number of shards to pick a shard.
> 08:38 <@elyograg> I think you probably wanted the compositeId router.
> 08:39 <@elyograg> implicit is not a very good name. It's technically
> correct,
> but the meaning of the word is not well known.
> 08:39 <@elyograg> "manual" would be a better name.
> {noformat}
> The word "implicit" has a very specific meaning, and I think it's
> absolutely correct terminology for what it does, but I don't think that
> it's very clear to a typical person. This is not the first time I've
> encountered the confusion.
> Could we deprecate the implicit name and use something much more
> descriptive and easily understood, like "manual" instead? Let's go
> ahead and accept implicit in 5.x releases, but issue a warning in the
> log. Maybe we can have a startup system property or a config option
> that will force the name to be updated in zookeeper and get rid of the
> warning. If we do this, my bias is to have an upgrade to 6.x force the
> name change in zookeeper.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
