[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-743?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12536845
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-743:
--------------------------------------
{quote}
I think this is OK?
{quote}
This was essentially the reason why I suggested to use two refcount values:
one to control when to close a reader, and one to control when to close
it's (shared) resources in case of SegmentReader. That approach would not
alter the behaviour of IndexReader.close().
But I agree that your approach is simpler and I also think it is okay to
change ensureOpen() and accept the slight API change.
So I'll go ahead and implement the refcount approach unless anybody objects.
Oh and Mike, thanks for bearing with me :-)
> IndexReader.reopen()
> --------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-743
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-743
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Reporter: Otis Gospodnetic
> Assignee: Michael Busch
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.3
>
> Attachments: IndexReaderUtils.java, lucene-743-take2.patch,
> lucene-743.patch, lucene-743.patch, lucene-743.patch, MyMultiReader.java,
> MySegmentReader.java, varient-no-isCloneSupported.BROKEN.patch
>
>
> This is Robert Engels' implementation of IndexReader.reopen() functionality,
> as a set of 3 new classes (this was easier for him to implement, but should
> probably be folded into the core, if this looks good).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
