Hey Andi,
I think that the best way of dealing with this, as there is little
downside and it avoids further complicating IndexReader, is to build
your reference counting around the IndexReader class rather then within it.
- Mark
Andi Vajda wrote:
I'd like to propose a patch for IndexReader but before I file a proper
bug
and attach the (simple) patch, I want to check here if my approach is the
right one.
I have a server where a bunch of threads are handling search requests. I
have a another process that updates the index used by the search
server and
that asks the searcher server to reopen its index reader after the
updates
completed.
When I reopen() the index reader, I also close the old one (if the
reopen()
yielded a new instance). This causes problems for the other threads that
are currently in the middle of a search request.
I'd like to propose the addition of two methods, acquire() and
release() (see below), that increment/decrement the ref count that
IndexReader instances currently maintain for related purposes. That
ref count prevents the index reader from being actually closed until
it reaches zero.
My server's search threads, thus acquiring and releasing the index
reader can be sure that the index reader they're currently using is
good until they're done with the current request, ie, until they
release() it.
Is this the right way to go about this ?
Thanks !
Andi..
public synchronized void acquire()
throws AlreadyClosedException
{
ensureOpen();
incRef();
}
public synchronized void release()
throws AlreadyClosedException, IOException
{
ensureOpen();
decRef();
}
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
