[ 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: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org