Riak2.0 with Solr Search: index on one node contains not all entries

Michael Weibel michael.weibel at gmail.com
Wed Mar 25 12:27:56 EDT 2015


Hi Zeeshan,

Ok, will do that and report back as soon as I have it.. Might take a while
though because I first also have to figure out whether I have still the
same issue or not.. ;)

Thanks!
Michael


2015-03-25 16:56 GMT+01:00 Zeeshan Lakhani <zlakhani at basho.com>:

> Hey Michael,
>
> Ideally, for this “testing" setup, n_val=2 would be the effective choice.
> I’d create a new bucket_type/bucket and re-PUT your data in and test search
> again to be sure.
>
> Let me know. Thanks.
>
> Zeeshan Lakhani
> programmer |
> software engineer at @basho |
> org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | paperswelove.org
> twitter => @zeeshanlakhani
>
> On Mar 25, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Michael Weibel <michael.weibel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Zeeshan,
>
> Thanks for your answer.
>
>> Just to be sure, does your custom schema include the required fields, as
>> mentioned in the docs:
>> http://docs.basho.com/riak/latest/dev/advanced/search-schema/#Custom-Schemas?
>>
>
> Yes, I double checked that now to make sure, and the schema includes the
> required fields.
>
>
>>  Are these Riak nodes joined? What’s your ring size, n_val value?
>>
>
> They run in a cluster, yes. Output of "riak-admin status":
>
> ring_creation_size : 64
> ring_members : ['riak at IPADDRESS','riak at IPADDRESS']
> ring_num_partitions : 64
> ring_ownership : <<"[{'riak at IPADDRESS',32},{'riak at IPADDRESS',32}]">>
> rings_reconciled : 0
> rings_reconciled_total : 33
>
> n_val is 3, the initial one. According to the docs we should probably
> either add another node or reduce it to "2" though..correct? (Sorry, newbie
> in riak here :D)
>
>
>> How are you querying the Solr nodes to know which node has the data and
>> which one doesn't? Coverage is R=1, so you would be getting a different
>> number on some search queries (using the standard
>> /search/query/<index_name>?...) if its only on one of the Solr cores.
>>
>
> Yes exactly. That's how I figured out that there's a difference, later on
> I queried the separate Solr instances using the solr admin interface
> itself. I also then fetched the missing key on both the riak nodes (without
> going to solr, just fetching it directly using the riak HTTP API) and they
> exist on both nodes.
>
>
>> Can you also post me a screenshot of your search AAE exchanges, e.g.
>> `riak-admin search aae-status`? You could look at this thread,
>> http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/2015-March/016926.html,
>> for answers on how to perform read-repair/repair the AAE tree.
>>
>
> aae-status is in the .log file attached.
>
> So you'd propose to perform a read-repair on the AAE tree?
>
> Best,
> Michael
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Zeeshan Lakhani
>> programmer |
>> software engineer at @basho |
>> org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | paperswelove.org
>> twitter => @zeeshanlakhani
>>
>> On Mar 25, 2015, at 6:42 AM, Michael Weibel <michael.weibel at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have on a test environment two riak nodes and each of them has solr
>> activated which index 3 buckets using a custom schema.
>> After testing a bit back and forth, I have the case that on one solr
>> node, an entry is not in the index (I know in which node though).
>> Fetching the specific key in the bucket works however, both nodes have
>> the respective entry.
>>
>> 1) How can this happen? I don't see any error/warning in the logs
>> (neither solr nor riak logs).
>> 2) Is there a possibility to fix this without having to do e.g. a PUT on
>> the specific key with the same content in order to update it?
>>
>> I tried to run a repair on the failing node using the guide:
>> http://docs.basho.com/riak/1.4.7/ops/running/recovery/repairing-indexes/#Repairing-Search-Indexes
>> When running the repair command on the partitions I received, it gave me
>> however a [{<PartitionId>, down}, {...}] response, which gives me an
>> uncomfortable feeling, but I didn't really figure out yet what this means
>> exactly.
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your help :)
>>
>> Best,
>> Michael
>> _______________________________________________
>> riak-users mailing list
>> riak-users at lists.basho.com
>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
>>
>>
>>
> <riak-admin-aae-status.log>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/attachments/20150325/a724e3a1/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the riak-users mailing list