[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9937?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15809559#comment-15809559
]
Mark Miller commented on SOLR-9937:
-----------------------------------
Another bug is that we didn't return even if the move worked - we did
super.move after anyway. Both fixed as additional commits in SOLR-9902.
> StandardDirectoryFactory::move never uses atomic implementation
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-9937
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9937
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: Mike Drob
> Assignee: Mark Miller
> Attachments: SOLR-9937.patch
>
>
> {noformat}
> Path path1 = ((FSDirectory)
> baseFromDir).getDirectory().toAbsolutePath();
> Path path2 = ((FSDirectory)
> baseFromDir).getDirectory().toAbsolutePath();
>
> try {
> Files.move(path1.resolve(fileName), path2.resolve(fileName),
> StandardCopyOption.ATOMIC_MOVE);
> } catch (AtomicMoveNotSupportedException e) {
> Files.move(path1.resolve(fileName), path2.resolve(fileName));
> }
> {noformat}
> Because {{path1 == path2}} this code never does anything and move always
> defaults to the less efficient implementation in DirectoryFactory.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
