Riak Search Pagination

Garrido zgbjgg at gmail.com
Mon Dec 21 20:50:11 EST 2015


No, we didn`t any change on the configuration storage, we only increases the SOLR memory in the JVM Options.
 
> On Dec 21, 2015, at 7:21 PM, Bryan Hunt <admin at binarytemple.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> It would seem the order of recreation may be different to that of the original ingest. Isn't sorting best performed on the application server side  in order to reduce demands on cluster RAM anyway? When you migrated to the new cluster did you make any change to the storage configuration ?
> 
>   Original Message  
> From: Garrido
> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 1:09 AM
> To: Bryan Hunt
> Cc: riak-users at lists.basho.com
> Subject: Re: Riak Search Pagination
> 
> Solr (2.x), 
>> On Dec 21, 2015, at 7:08 PM, Bryan Hunt <admin at binarytemple.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> In the context of Solr (2.x), legacy (1.4), or secondary indexes (2i) (1.x+)? 
>> 
>> 
>> Original Message 
>> From: Garrido
>> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 11:36 PM
>> To: riak-users at lists.basho.com
>> Subject: Riak Search Pagination
>> 
>> Hello, 
>> 
>> Recently we migrated our Riak nodes to another network, so we backup the data and then regenerate the ring, all is well, but there is a strange behaviour in a riak search, for example if we execute a query using the riak_erlang_client, returns the objects in the order:
>> 
>> A, B, C
>> 
>> And then if we execute again the same query the result is:
>> 
>> B, A, C, 
>> 
>> So, in other order, do you know what is causing this?, before to change our riak ring to another network, it was working perfectly.
>> 
>> Thank you
>> _______________________________________________
>> riak-users mailing list
>> riak-users at lists.basho.com
>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
> 





More information about the riak-users mailing list