[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3454?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13145111#comment-13145111
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-3454:
--------------------------------------------
Some quick googling uncovers depressing examples of over-optimizing:
https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/FCREPO-155
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3912253/is-it-mandatory-to-optimize-the-lucene-index-after-write
http://issues.liferay.com/browse/LPS-2944
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E19316-01/820-7054/girqf/index.html
https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/MNGECLIPSE-2359
http://blog.inflinx.com/tag/lucene
That last one has this fun comment:
{noformat}
// Lucene recommends calling optimize upon completion of indexing
writer.optimize();
{noformat}
> rename optimize to a less cool-sounding name
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3454
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3454
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 3.4, 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Attachments: LUCENE-3454.patch
>
>
> I think users see the name optimize and feel they must do this, because who
> wants a suboptimal system? but this probably just results in wasted time and
> resources.
> maybe rename to collapseSegments or something?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
