On 7/10/06, Chuck Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Balmain wrote on 07/09/2006 06:44 PM:
> On 7/10/06, Chuck Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Marvin Humphrey wrote on 07/08/2006 11:13 PM:
>> >
>> > On Jul 8, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Williams wrote:
>> >
>> >> Many things would be cl
To clarify, higher level (application level) adds and deletes can be
managed at a lower level such that index readers and writers aren't
continually opened and closed.
...
The big question is, what kind of efficiencies do you get by putting
this functionallity in IndexWriter vs a higher level cl
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-565?page=all ]
Ning Li updated LUCENE-565:
---
Attachment: IndexWriter.July09.patch
NewIndexModifier.July09.patch
Hi Otis,
I've attached two patch files:
- IndexWriter.July09.patch is an updated ver
David Balmain wrote on 07/09/2006 06:44 PM:
> On 7/10/06, Chuck Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Marvin Humphrey wrote on 07/08/2006 11:13 PM:
>> >
>> > On Jul 8, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Williams wrote:
>> >
>> >> Many things would be cleaner in Lucene if fields had a global
>> semantics,
>>
On 7/10/06, Chuck Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Marvin Humphrey wrote on 07/08/2006 11:13 PM:
>
> On Jul 8, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Williams wrote:
>
>> Many things would be cleaner in Lucene if fields had a global semantics,
>> i.e., if properties like text vs. binary, Index, Store, TermVe
On Jul 9, 2006, at 11:31 AM, Chuck Williams wrote:
Marvin Humphrey wrote on 07/08/2006 11:13 PM:
On Jul 8, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Williams wrote:
Many things would be cleaner in Lucene if fields had a global
semantics,
i.e., if properties like text vs. binary, Index, Store,
TermVector,
Marvin Humphrey wrote on 07/08/2006 11:13 PM:
>
> On Jul 8, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Chuck Williams wrote:
>
>> Many things would be cleaner in Lucene if fields had a global semantics,
>> i.e., if properties like text vs. binary, Index, Store, TermVector, the
>> appropriate Analyzer, the assignment of Dir
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-509?page=comments#action_12419926 ]
Chuck Williams commented on LUCENE-509:
---
LUCENE-545 does resolve this in a more general way, although the code to get
precisely one field value efficiently is slightly c
I should metion that there is an upside to the patch it can
uncover bugs by detecting access after a close(). Before, this would
have worked with a RAMDirectory, but failed with a FSDirectory.
-Yonik
http://incubator.apache.org/solr Solr, the open-source Lucene search server
---
On 7/9/06, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: This patch, while not doing much harm, is not really "best practice" in
: Java and the existing RAMDirectory close() was correct.
Why is this not a best practice? (or do you mean that in a "not
particularly good" sense instead of "bad" sen
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-400?page=comments#action_12419913 ]
Otis Gospodnetic commented on LUCENE-400:
-
Sebastian, ever figured out the problem? Also, is there a way to get rid of
the Commons Collections? Lucene has no run-tim
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-509?page=all ]
Otis Gospodnetic reassigned LUCENE-509:
---
Assign To: Otis Gospodnetic
> Performance optimization when retrieving a single field from a document
> --
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-478?page=all ]
Otis Gospodnetic reassigned LUCENE-478:
---
Assign To: Otis Gospodnetic
> CJK char list
> -
>
> Key: LUCENE-478
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCE
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-390?page=comments#action_12419911 ]
Otis Gospodnetic commented on LUCENE-390:
-
I'm not using IndexModifier, but doesn't IndexModifier provide the same
functionality?
If so, should we resolve/close this i
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-168?page=all ]
Otis Gospodnetic resolved LUCENE-168:
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
Assign To: (was: Lucene Developers)
Ancient bug report. It seems like it's always on Windows platform and, from
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-555?page=all ]
Otis Gospodnetic resolved LUCENE-555:
-
Resolution: Incomplete
A small index for reproduction of the bug was never provided and it doesn't
look like the original reporter still has pro
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-562?page=all ]
Otis Gospodnetic resolved LUCENE-562:
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
I suppose this is a "won't fix".
> Allow Unstored AND Unindexed Fields as in 1.4
> ---
I think the only time setting a object reference to null is during a
"close" type operation is if the object is in some way shared (or
could be), and the top-level object can be reopened or used again.
Since no operations are valid on an IndexReader after close, the
releasing of private obj
18 matches
Mail list logo
