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

Zeeshan Lakhani zlakhani at basho.com
Wed Mar 25 12:33:26 EDT 2015


Ok, no worries.

Also, sometimes, AAE may take a little time to complete the exchanges. Definitely read through my responses in http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/2015-March/016926.html <http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/2015-March/016926.html> if you continue to see issues with Riak Search being out-of-sync.

Thanks.

Zeeshan Lakhani
programmer | 
software engineer at @basho | 
org. member/founder of @papers_we_love | paperswelove.org
twitter => @zeeshanlakhani

> On Mar 25, 2015, at 12:27 PM, Michael Weibel <michael.weibel at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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 <mailto: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 <http://paperswelove.org/>
> twitter => @zeeshanlakhani
> 
>> On Mar 25, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Michael Weibel <michael.weibel at gmail.com <mailto: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? <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 <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 <http://paperswelove.org/>
>> twitter => @zeeshanlakhani
>> 
>>> On Mar 25, 2015, at 6:42 AM, Michael Weibel <michael.weibel at gmail.com <mailto: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 <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 <mailto:riak-users at lists.basho.com>
>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_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/20150325/3b2b44d5/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the riak-users mailing list