2011/4/1 Mattias Persson <[email protected]> > > > 2011/4/1 Axel Morgner <[email protected]> > >> Using 1.3-M03 here. I also try to reproduce it with an isolated test. >> Will keep you informed about the result. >> >> Much appreciated Alex >
Sorry, Axel :) > > >> Axel >> >> On 01.04.2011 11:01, Mattias Persson wrote: >> > 2011/4/1 Michael Hunger<[email protected]> >> > >> >> What about the line in the if that doesn't execute the block, if >> >> index-hits .hasNext() returns false? >> >> >> >> Does this close the underlying structures ? >> >> >> >>>> if (hits != null&& hits.iterator().hasNext()) { >> > As of some milestone back it closes the iterator if there are no results >> in >> > it. Which version of neo4j are you running Alex? >> > >> >> and here 2 iterators are opened? perhaps this might be a problem, one >> for >> >> the if, the second for the for-each loop >> >> >> > Actually IndexHits is cheating where #iterator() {return this;} so >> there's >> > only one iterator. >> > >> > As a note I can say that I'm currently running a test with 30 threads, >> > randomly modifying/querying an index where some queries are looped >> through >> > and some just a bit and then closed manually. Also getSingle() is used >> > randomly. And as far as I can see, after 10 minutes of such a test >> running >> > the number of open files is kept it a steady low. I just cannot >> reproduce >> > this on the latest milestone. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Neo4j mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user >> > > > > -- > Mattias Persson, [[email protected]] > Hacker, Neo Technology > www.neotechnology.com > -- Mattias Persson, [[email protected]] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list [email protected] https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
