Hi all,
I'm using Lucene version 7.5.0. We have a test that does something like:
Thread 1:
Field idStringField = new StringField("id", id,
Field.Store.YES);
Field contentsField = new TextField("contents", reader);
Document document = new Document();
I'm not seeing anything there that would synchronize, or serialize, the
read after the write and commit. Did you expect that for some reason?
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018, 6:00 AM Boris Petrov Hi all,
>
> I'm using Lucene version 7.5.0. We have a test that does something like:
>
> Thread 1:
>
>
If you mean the synchronization of the threads, it is not in the
example, but Thread 2 is *started* after Thread 1 finished executing the
code that I gave as an example. So there is happens-before between them.
If you mean synchronization on the Lucene level - isn't that what
"maybeRefreshBlocking"
That should work, I think, but if you are serializing these threads so
that they cannot run concurrently, maybe try running both operations
in a single thread, at least as a test.
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 9:16 AM Boris Petrov wrote:
>
> If you mean the synchronization of the threads, it is not in th
Well, it's a bit involved to try it in a single thread as I've
oversimplified the example. But as far as I understand this should work,
right? So something else is wrong? Committing the writer and then
"maybeRefreshBlocking" should be enough to have the changes visible, yes?
On 11/9/18 4:45 PM, Mi
If it's hard to do in a single thread, how about timestamping the
events to insure that they happen in the expected order?
That would verify the sequencing is happening as you expect and
_still_ not see the expected docs...
Assuming it does fail, do you think you could reduce it to a
multi-thread
Well, while debugging I put a bunch of println's which showed the
expected order. And, besides, I've written the code, I know that writing
to the index happens way before searching in it - the test makes sure of
that.
If you think there indeed might be some problem, I'll try to reproduce
it in a s
You might be able to do this with a couple of threads in a single
program, but certainly up to you.
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 7:47 AM Boris Petrov wrote:
>
> Well, while debugging I put a bunch of println's which showed the
> expected order. And, besides, I've written the code, I know th
