[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-667?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12618773#action_12618773
]
Noble Paul commented on SOLR-667:
---------------------------------
Fuad. You cannot trivialize concurrent programming so easily. Whatever
we have commented are from our experience (and wisdom) . There is a
price to pay it. Java could have easily eliminated the
java.util.concurrent package by using 'volatile' everywhere and no
need of AtomicInteger,AtomimcLong etc. So they are there for a reason
BTW. Using TreeSet is not 'heavy' . It is the right tool for right
purpose. If you need a sorted set that is best
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Fuad Efendi (JIRA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--
--Noble Paul
> Alternate LRUCache implementation
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-667
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-667
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: search
> Affects Versions: 1.3
> Reporter: Noble Paul
> Attachments: ConcurrentLRUCache.java
>
>
> The only available SolrCache i.e LRUCache is based on _LinkedHashMap_ which
> has _get()_ also synchronized. This can cause severe bottlenecks for faceted
> search. Any alternate implementation which can be faster/better must be
> considered.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
