Shay Banon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That what was I was hoping to get to eventually. I agree that flush can do
> much more (and be better renamed to prepare). If we can get something like
> that, it would be great.
I'll work through a patch...
> Just a note regarding two phase transactio
t; concurrent merges completes it would also be blocked from committing
> the changes to the index until commit(). We should probably also
> deprecate abort() and rename it to rollback(). I'll open an issue for
> this...
>
> Mike
>
> Shay Banon wrote:
>>
>&
t the
progress you guys make is amazing!. I would still like to ask a quick
question regarding deprecation of flush in IndexWriter. I think
that there
are cases where flush is needed. For example, in trying to create a
two
phase (or as close as possible to one) commit. The flush can be
used
Hi,
I was just looking a bit at the trunk. First, let me say that the
progress you guys make is amazing!. I would still like to ask a quick
question regarding deprecation of flush in IndexWriter. I think that there
are cases where flush is needed. For example, in trying to create a two
phase
