Ah OK - makes sense! One more thing I pondered when thinking about the use case: Would the indexer need to be Lucene-based? It seems what is needed is that nodes can be found quickly based on certain properties, but not the additional features Lucene provides. So, an alternative for the “fast local indexer” could maybe be our PropertyIndex implementation. But it would not persist in the repo - only keep the index in-mem.
Reason why I thought about this: it *might* be easier with such an impl to evict old items. Also, it *might* be more light-weigth solution. I have no real arguments or proof for either of these considerations, though. WDYT? On 24/07/15 09:09, "Chetan Mehrotra" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Michael Marth <[email protected]> wrote: >> From your description I am not sure how the indexing would be triggered for >> local changes. Probably not through the Async Indexer (this would not gain >> us much, right?). Would this be a Commit Hook? > >My thought was to use an Observor so as to not add cost to commit >call. Observor would listen only for local changes and would invoke >IndexUpdate on the diff > >Chetan Mehrotra
