Hello, On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Thomas Mueller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>then we still don't have >>transactional searches > > My plan was to support searches for data that is persisted (no search in > the transient space). Yes this seems very natural to me, so very much agree. However what I meant was that after a search is executed, you get back a jcr NodeIterator from the search result. In the mean time, while iterating, a node from the result can be deleted by a different session. So, the search result is not transactional. Which makes much sense: We are not building a database! However, when we cannot and should not try to implement transactional searches, then why should we try to create consistent indexes? Would it be consistent enough, that only a jcr session that does a 'save', has to wait for the index to be updated with his changes. Thus, other sessions can query while the index queue is non empty. Any way, perhaps too much into the details Regards Ard > But the index should be updated as part of the save > operation I think (except for fulltext search). > > Regards, > Thomas > -- Amsterdam - Oosteinde 11, 1017 WT Amsterdam Boston - 1 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02142 US +1 877 414 4776 (toll free) Europe +31(0)20 522 4466 www.onehippo.com
