Hi Maik,
So what happens in this case:
IndexAccessProvider accessProvider = new IndexAccessProvider(directory,
analyzer);
LuceneIndexAccessor accessor = new LuceneIndexAccessor(accessProvider);
accessor.open();
IndexWriter writer = accessor.getWriter();
// reference to the same instance?
IndexWriter writer2 = accessor.getWriter();
writer.addDocument(....);
writer2.addDocument(....);
// I didn't release the writer yet
// will this block?
IndexReader reader = accessor.getReader();
reader.delete(....);
It looks like you answered that in Bugzilla already. But doesn't that
make management of IndexWriter/IndexReader as "involved" as doing it
directly? Is the idea that this shields the user from needing to do
his own synchronization? Actually, I can see how working with this
code can be simpler than dealing with details yourself.
Is there a way to time out the blocking getWriter/Reader()?
To deal with managing index-modifying access to the index I often use
code that acts as a facade to IndexReader/Writer and provides methods
such as index(....), optimize(), and delete(....). All of these
methods have index-modifying code inside a "synchronized
(_myDirInstanceHere)" block. And that seems to work without the need
to open, close, and release explicitly.
I guess such code doesn't give you direct access to IndexReader/Writer,
so that's the drawback.... and I guess the synchronization really
blocking as well. :)
Otis
--- Maik Schreiber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I didn't follow this closely, but are you saying that
> > LuceneIndexAccessor then replaces IOError caused by locking with
> > blocking calls? It sounds like the client of LuceneIndexAccessor
> still
> > needs to keep track of open IndexReaders, IndexWriters, etc., or
> else
> > one can end up with a hard-to-track blocked call somewhere in the
> code,
> > no? It would be nice to see how this works via a unit test.
>
> Please see http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34995#c3
>
> The client just does getWriter(), getReader() or whatever it wishes,
> then
> uses release() to give the instances back. The index accessor is
> responsible
> for synchronizing access such that no two writers can be open at the
> same
> time etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
