On Tuesday 17 October 2006 20:32, Chris Hostetter wrote: > > : But as long as there is no real a memory leak, what is the point of > : adding this close functionality? > > I think the concern is not so much that Lucene core as is has any leaks -- > but that subclasses of core implimentations have no mechanism for safely > managing resources. Custom Directory implimenations that rely on close() > or custom Scorers that try to do anything complex involving external > resources would have leaks of whatever resource they need to explicitly > manage.
I remember being surprised that Lucene Scorers do not need a closing method to manage their resources. The garbage collector does this. When custom Scorers and/or Directories need a close method, it can also be provided by subclassing Scorer, IndexSearcher and Directory in the custom code. Not providing this close method in the Lucene core passes the message that a working implementation is possible without it. Regards, Paul Elschot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
