On Monday 11 September 2006 15:36, Yonik Seeley wrote: > On 9/10/06, Chuck Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Could a kill -9 prevent data from reaching disk for files that were > > previously closed? > > No. After a close() the OS should have all the data... the process > may be killed but the OS will eventually flush all the buffers, etc. > File creation is pretty much always synchronous so I have no idea how > your problem could have happened (missing segment files). IO error or > something else temporarily filling up the disk?
"Pretty much always" is logically equivalent to "not always" :) , see also below. > If you have a power loss or crash, then that *can* cause data loss. > There may be mount options to make more file operations synchronous, > or you could maybe write your own Directory implementation to make > things more synchronous. New segments will have to be flushed/fsynced before the segments file. This could be hidden in a Directory in case a Directory hides Lucene's segments file. Regards, Paul Elschot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
