Hi Patrik Thanks for the thoughtful responses. I am not a pro with Searchers yet, but it seems like closing + opening searchers would still result in a small period of unserviceability. I would also like to stick to the Directory API so that I can keep the option to use FS or RAM based indexes.
I think a slight extension to this idea may really do the trick. It's as follows: 1. Create Index A + Reader A. 2. set CurrentReader = A 3. After time interval T, build Index B + Reader B. 4. set CurrentReader = B 5. After time interval T, rebuild Index A + Reopen A 6. set CurrentReader = A etc. The advantage here being that the '=' operation is atomic and indivisible - the currentReader variable always points to a valid and up-todate index. Although this system doesn't GUARANTEE there won't be a service interruption, in practice if T is long enough there shouldn't be a problem. Thoughts? I'm curious if this solution reflects a misunderstanding about the way Lucene works. Thanks, Adam ---------------------------------------- > Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 22:11:33 -0500 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Rebuilding index on a regular basis > > Hi, > > How about this: > > 1) You copy the files that make your index in a new folder > 2) You update your index in that new folder (forcing if necessary, old locks > will not be valid) > 3) When update is completed, close your readers, and open them on the new > index. > 4) Copy the fresh index files to the previous location for next round, where > you won't need the initial copy to a fresh folder. > > That way, you won't have to reindex all your documents (assuming only a > small subset needs updating) and will be able to switch to a more up to date > index more easily and often. > > Patrick > > > On 12/20/06, Scott Sellman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Note: I have changed the title of this thread to match its content > > > > I am currently facing a similar issue. I am dealing with a large index > > that is constantly used and needs to be updated on a daily basis. For > > fear of corruption I would rather rebuild the index each time, > > performing tests against it before using it. However the problem I am > > having is switching in the old index without causing service > > interruption. As long as queries are being made against the index I am > > running into locking issues with the index files, preventing me from > > putting the new index in place. Any suggestions? > > > > Thanks, > > Scott > > _________________________________________________________________ Get the Live.com Holiday Page for recipes, gift-giving ideas, and more. www.live.com/?addtemplate=holiday --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
