I was thinking of doing something like this for my numerous indices over on Simpy.com. However, I was thinking of something much simpler - an IndexSearcher subclass with close() overriden. The implementation of close() would then just start a Thread and call super.close() after N seconds.
I haven't done this yet, so I'm not sure if this will do, but it seems simpler than the contribution in JIRA. Otis --- "Vanlerberghe, Luc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Good rule of thumb: don't ever count on the garbage collector > cleaning > up for you (even if you call System.gc() to give it a hint). > > You should close your IndexSearchers, but with a multithreaded > application it's difficult to know when (you have to keep them open > until no thread uses it any more) > > I created a class DelayCloseIndexSearcher class and posted it in jira > just for this purpose (See > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-445) > There's a use case in the javadoc. > > I'm using it in my production system (but in a more complex way than > in > the example code) and I don't (seem to :) have any problems... > > Either way, I would very much appreciate some feedback about the > code. > > Thanks, > > Luc > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Magoffin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: vrijdag 18 november 2005 8:58 > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: References to deleted file handles in long-running > server > application > > I'm updating nearly continuously (probably average about every 10 > seconds). I don't explicitly close the IndexSearcher objects I > create, > as > I share them across threads, but do leave them to be garbage > collected. > I > ran into index corruption issues when I explicitly closed them, since > I > don't have any code keeping track of how many threads might be using > a > given IndexSearcher. > > I wonder if it's worth the effort of adding that code in, or can I be > ensured that when the IndexSearcher objects are garbage collected the > file > handles will be released? > > -- m@ > > > How often are you updating your index? Are you closing your old > > IndexSearchers after switching over to the new index? You'll need > to > > close the searchers in order to release the file handle. This was > the > > same issue I was experiencing: > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-java-user/200504.mbox/%3 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > - Monsur > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Matt Magoffin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 11:05 PM > >> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: References to deleted file handles in > >> long-running server application > >> > >> > >> I've been watching our servers today, and now there are 2500 > >> "deleted" file handles open like this. Seems to be quite > >> large. Still don't know why there are so many. I'm using the > >> compound index format already to reduce the number of open files. > >> > >> -- m@ > >> > >> > Hello, I use Lucene in a long-running server application on a > Linux > >> > server, and the other day I got the "Too many open files" > >> exception. > >> > I've increased the number of allowed file handles, but was > checking > >> > out the open file handles using "lsof", and see about 300 > >> files listed > >> > like the > >> > following: > >> > > >> > java 1458 jboss 436r REG 8,2 3945 > 6258825 > >> > /var/lucene-index/_1o6hl.cfs (deleted) > >> > java 1458 jboss 437r REG 8,2 3467 > 6258829 > >> > /var/lucene-index/_1o6hp.cfs (deleted) > >> > java 1458 jboss 438r REG 8,2 2743 > 6258826 > >> > /var/lucene-index/_1o6ht.cfs (deleted) > >> > java 1458 jboss 439r REG 8,2 4069 > 6258817 > >> > /var/lucene-index/_1o6hx.cfs (deleted) > >> > java 1458 jboss 440r REG 8,2 4098 > 6258830 > >> > /var/lucene-index/_1o6i1.cfs (deleted) > >> > java 1458 jboss 441r REG 8,2 1817 > 6258821 > >> > /var/lucene-index/_1o6i3.cfs (deleted) > >> > > >> > I haven't been monitoring this long enough to tell if the number > >> > simply continues to grow over time or levels off at some point. > >> > > >> > I was wondering if this behavior to be expected? When will the > >> > application release these deleted file handles (if ever)? > Perhaps > >> > during garbage collection? Or might I be handling the index > >> > incorrectly in some way? > >> > > >> > Any thoughts appreciated. > >> > -- m@ > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> 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] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
