On 11/4/07, Michael McCandless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The problem is, on a hard shutdown (kill -9 or JVM/machine crashes), > apparently future operations may have completed while some past > operations have not. For example, the new segments_N file was > successfully written while say the _X.fdx file of the just-flushed > segment was not successfully written, even though Lucene had written & > closed _X.fdx before segments_N.
That should be impossible except for a machine crash. Kill -9 or a JVM crash should have no effect on data already written. But a sync option would be both simple and useful for people trying to take live snapshots of an index, or to protect against machine crashes. This isn't an absolute 100% guarantee either (so don't test for it) - the drives often lie to the OS about data being flushed. It's the best we can do at our level though. http://www.google.com/search?q=fsync+drive+lies -Yonik --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
