On Wed, Jan 17, 2007, Michael McCandless wrote about "Re: adding "explicit commits" to Lucene?": > Perhaps instead of a single "grand unified Index" class in the future, > we aim to move all index write methods into IndexWriter? This > is then simple for users to use: if you want to change anything about > the index, use an IndexWriter; if you want to do searches, use an > IndexReader. If we aim for this as our eventual goal, LUCENE-565 in > fact gets us quite a bit closer.
It's important to remember, that whatever class knows how to do deletions, this class will need to replicate much of the IndexReader functionality. Why? Because just like an IndexReader, the deleting class needs to know how to find documents matching a term, and like an IndexReader (and unlike an InderWriter) it may need to open all segments, not just the one segment that is being written. So perhaps a "grand unified Index" does make sense, instead of repeating the same code and/or functionality in both IndexReader and IndexWriter. -- Nadav Har'El | Wednesday, Jan 17 2007, 27 Tevet 5767 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |----------------------------------------- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |I had a lovely evening. Unfortunately, http://nadav.harel.org.il |this wasn't it. - Groucho Marx --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
