[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3830?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13454291#comment-13454291
]
Adrien Grand commented on SOLR-3830:
------------------------------------
bq. we should not be adding new names with "Fast" in front of them
This is why I also suggested to rename FastLRUCache to ConcurrentLRUCache in my
2nd paragraph (or something else, I'm open to other ideas).
bq. OK, let's leave things as they are then. Documentation is the key if we
need to clarify anything.
Why don't you like renaming FastLRUCache to something else and adding a
deprecated FastLRUCache subclass for backward compatibility, as Chris suggests?
> Rename LFUCache to FastLFUCache
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-3830
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3830
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.0-BETA
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Priority: Minor
>
> I find it a little disturbing that LFUCache shares most of its behavior (not
> strictly bounded size, good at concurrent reads, slow at writes unless
> eviction is performed in a separate thread) with FastLRUCache while it sounds
> like it is the LFU equivalent of LRUCache (strictly bounded size,
> synchronized reads, fast writes) so I'd like to rename it to FastLFUCache.
> Maybe we should also rename these Fast*Cache to Concurrent*Cache so that
> people don't think that they are better than their non Fast alternatives in
> every way.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
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
