Thanks for the input Ilan.
On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 5:25 PM Ilan Ginzburg <ilans...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think adding shards (even from 1 to 2) is the solution. > You need enough replicas so all your nodes share the load, but with such > small shards you likely don't need more than 1. > If your nodes are saturated by traffic, you need more nodes (and more > replicas so that the added nodes have a replica as well). > > Ilan > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2023, 8:23 AM HariBabu kuruva <hari2708.kur...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Ilan, > > > > Thank you for your reply. > > > > Application requests are facing connection failures a couple of times. So > > our DEV team requested to add more shards as they are expecting more read > > heavy queries in the future. > > > > Initially they requested two shards and now they are asking for one more > > shard.(3 shards). We have a total of 6 solr nodes available. > > > > The disk sizes consumed by the currently created two shards are around > 2.5 > > GB each. > > > > Please let me know if any other information is required. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 11:29 PM Ilan Ginzburg <ilans...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Well, if the size of the two shards you now have is equivalent, you > will > > > not be able to get to 3 balanced (in size) shards. > > > > > > If one of the two seems to get more data (is larger), split that one. > > This > > > might be the case if you use fancy routing for deciding which doc goes > > > where. > > > > > > Otherwise, to get to 3 similarly sized shards you need to explicitly > > > specify the ranges during the split. > > > Either create one subshard with twice the range of the other so you can > > > split the larger one into two and end up with 3 similarly sized shards, > > or > > > split the initial shard into 3 subshards in one go (I've never tried > > > splitting into more that 2 shards though, so I end up with a power of 2 > > > number of balanced shards, assuming uniform distribution of docs into > the > > > hash range). > > > > > > But I assume your real goal is not having a specific number of shards. > > > What issues are you running into in your current setup that you're > trying > > > to address? > > > You mentioned "better performance" but performance of what? Query? > > > Indexing? Are you running out of memory? CPU? Are you adding nodes > > > (servers) and/or replicas as you're increasing the number of shards? > > > > > > What has improved as you moved from one to two shards? Why decide then > > that > > > you then want to have 3 shards and no stay at 2 or move to 4? > > > > > > Ilan > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2023, 5:48 PM HariBabu kuruva < > hari2708.kur...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > I did sharding, splitted shard1 into shard-1_0 and shard-1_1 > > > > I want to have one more shard(3 shards). In this case, which shard > > > should I > > > > split . Please advise. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 11:17 AM HariBabu kuruva < > > > hari2708.kur...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > ++ FYI, I can see the old shard automatically removed. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 11:39 AM HariBabu kuruva < > > > > > hari2708.kur...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks for your reply. > > > > >> > > > > >> I am a little bit worried about PROD. Can I go ahead and do the > same > > > > >> steps in PROD ? Do I need to take any backups or any steps before > > > > >> doing this? > > > > >> > > > > >> On Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 8:51 AM Mikhail Khludnev <m...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Hello Hari. > > > > >>> If new shards are handling queries and updates well it's ok to > have > > > old > > > > >>> shard inactive. > > > > >>> You can request DELETESHARD to reclaim the disk space. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 6:19 PM HariBabu kuruva < > > > > >>> hari2708.kur...@gmail.com> > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Hi All, > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > I would like to add a new shard to the existing collection to > > have > > > > >>> better > > > > >>> > performance. Currently we have one shard. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Solr - 8.11.1 > > > > >>> > Nodes(servers) - 10 (Non prod - 4 nodes) > > > > >>> > Zookeepers-5 > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > I have tried the SPLITSHARD command in one of the non prod > > > > >>> environments. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > * > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > https://solrserver.corp.company.com:8981/solr/admin/collections?action=SPLITSHARD&collection=abcStore&shard=shard1 > > > > >>> > < > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > https://solrserver.corp.company.com:8981/solr/admin/collections?action=SPLITSHARD&collection=abcStore&shard=shard1 > > > > >>> > >* > > > > >>> > Now i can see total 3 shards > > > > >>> > Shard1 > > > > >>> > Shard1_0 > > > > >>> > Shard1_1 > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > But Shard1 is shown as inactive. Please let me know if we need > to > > > > >>> remove > > > > >>> > this ? > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Please help me if this is the correct way of splitting the > shard. > > > > >>> > Are there any impacts to the data because of this ? > > > > >>> > What are the measures to be taken while doing this in a PROD > > > > >>> environment. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > -- > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks and Regards, > > > > >>> > Hari > > > > >>> > Mobile:9790756568 > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> -- > > > > >>> Sincerely yours > > > > >>> Mikhail Khludnev > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -- > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks and Regards, > > > > >> Hari > > > > >> Mobile:9790756568 > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > > Hari > > > > > Mobile:9790756568 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > > > Hari > > > > Mobile:9790756568 > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > Hari > > Mobile:9790756568 > > > -- Thanks and Regards, Hari Mobile:9790756568
