nterrupted out there - we have seen no other reports and its
now the non windows default in both Lucene and Solr.
> Revise NIOFSDirectory and its usage due to NIO limitations on Thread.interrupt
> --
>
>
provides a testcase
triggering the behavior. this might be little out of date now but I thought I
add it for completeness
> Revise NIOFSDirectory and its usage due to NIO limitations on Thread.interr
2.9
2.9.1
3.0
> Revise NIOFSDirectory and its usage due to NIO limitations on Thread.interrupt
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-2239
>
Revise NIOFSDirectory and its usage due to NIO limitations on Thread.interrupt
--
Key: LUCENE-2239
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2239
Project: Lucene
Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 1:48 PM
>> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subj
PM
> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Thread.interrupt()
>
> OK, I agree we shouldn't burden people with another checked exception.
>
> But we should differentiate it, so our own exception, subclassing
> either RuntimeException or IOException sounds g
ss it. If you are advanced enough to be
calling Thread.interrupt (or using Futures, which can call
Thread.interrupt), then you should be able to handle the resulting
unchecked exception?
Mike
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> I have seen this yesterday, too (when comi
age-
> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:54 PM
> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Thread.interrupt()
>
> As a followon to LUCENE-1573, we had stated that in 3.0 instead of
> throwing RuntimeExcept
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Michael McCandless
wrote:
> As a followon to LUCENE-1573, we had stated that in 3.0 instead of
> throwing RuntimeException when a Thread inside Lucene is interrupted,
> we would throw InterruptedException.
>
> Do we want to do this? Technically I think it's the ri
As a followon to LUCENE-1573, we had stated that in 3.0 instead of
throwing RuntimeException when a Thread inside Lucene is interrupted,
we would throw InterruptedException.
Do we want to do this? Technically I think it's the right thing to
do, but, I started to implement it and found that it bas
10 matches
Mail list logo