No. actually I dont close the searcher. I just set a flag to true or false. my considerations are: [please note I provided a ResultSet so I display the result page by page and dont load all the result in a list] 1- should I open a searcher for each user? and one reader for all user session? 2- or create a pool of searcher and one reader for all searcher? 3- or a pool of searcher and each has its own reader. but never close them just set a flag to true.
which one? On 2/25/07, Nicolas Lalevée <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le dimanche 25 février 2007 16:55, Mohammad Norouzi a écrit: > so, you mean, I open one reader for each session (each user) and never > close it until the session has expired? if I do this, is that affect the > performance? The searcher/reader is a view on the index. And each time you open a new one, it cost some time. And the only reason to have a new view on the index is that you modified it. As you never modify it, as said Mark, never close your searcher/reader. If your sevral users are reading the same index, you might share the instance of the searcher in the different user sessions. Nicolas > > On 2/25/07, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you never modify your index you should never need to close your > > reader (or searcher). Doing so would just slow you down. > > > > Mohammad Norouzi wrote: > > > Hi > > > actually I dont have any writer or writing reader. I just have reader. > > > when > > > a reader is created by the user because the document returned by hits > > > is very much, for example 20,000 so I display the result page by page. > > > whenever > > > user click to next page the hits will use the reader to load next 20 > > > records, > > > besides, I dont have one directory, there are more than one directory > > > > and > > > > > index on the server and each user may request for one of them. > > > the problem is, a user may close his browser window and the reader > > > will stay > > > open becasue I cant detect it. and either if his session expires my > > > destroy > > > method will be called and searcher will close but in the cached > > > searcher i > > > can not detect which one is closed and ready it for next user. if the > > > searcher had a isClosed() method it was easy to determine but > > > unfortunately > > > it's has'nt > > > > > > any idea? > > > thanks again > > > > > > On 2/25/07, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I am a bit confused about what you are asking. Why do you need the > > >> Searcher to time out? That code should release your searchers at the > > >> appropriate times...when the index has been modified. The way that I > > > > use > > > > >> it is to make a synchronized map that keeps around an index accessor > > > > for > > > > >> each index that I open...from there the code should do the rest...when > > > > a > > > > >> writer or a writing reader is released the code waits for all > > >> searchers to be released and then clears the cache of searchers and > > >> new searchers are created when requested until another writer or > > >> writing reader is released... > > >> > > >> Mohammad Norouzi wrote: > > >> > Thank you Mark for your useful help. the code you introduce was very > > >> > helpful > > >> > for me > > >> > > > >> > but my only question is that I need to place an idle time for each > > >> > > >> open > > >> > > >> > searcher, so if it exceed the specific time then release that > > > > searcher > > > > >> > and > > >> > get ready for another thread. > > >> > > > >> > how can I put such this feature, I was thinking of a timeout > > > > listener, > > > > >> > but > > >> > dont know where tu put it. I have a SingleSearcher that wraps > > > > lucene's > > > > >> > Searcher and it returns an ResultSet in which I put a Hits object. > > >> > do I have > > >> > to put the time in my ResultSet or my SingleSeacher? > > >> > > > >> > still I dont know ehrthrt the reader is important for Hits or > > >> > > >> Searcher? > > >> > > >> > consider I passed a hits to my ResultSet, now, if I close searcher, > > >> > will the > > >> > Reader get closed? or another vague thing is can a Reader work > > > > thread > > > > >> > safely for every Searcher with differenet queries? > > >> > > > >> > Thank you very much again. > > >> > > > >> > On 2/22/07, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> >> I would not do this from scratch...if you are interested in Solr go > > >> > > >> that > > >> > > >> >> route else I would build off > > >> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-390 > > >> >> > > >> >> - Mark > > >> >> > > >> >> Mohammad Norouzi wrote: > > >> >> > Hi all, > > >> >> > I am going to build a Searcher pooling. if any one has > > >> > > >> experience on > > >> > > >> >> > this, I > > >> >> > would be glad to hear his/her recommendation and suggestion. I > > > > want > > > > >> to > > >> > > >> >> > know > > >> >> > what issues I should be apply. considering I am going to use > > >> > > >> this on > > >> a > > >> > > >> >> > web > > >> >> > application with many user sessions. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > thank you very much in advance. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >> >> 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]
-- Regards, Mohammad
