I have better things to do than read a 10,000 word incident that
discusses about 100 different topics under the generic heading
"Further steps towards flexible indexing" in order to answer a simple

You are a moron. And I don't mean that in a offensive way - I am
using the secondary definition.

Main Entry: mo·ron 
Etymology: irregular from Greek mōros foolish, stupid
Date: 1910
1usually offensive : a mildly mentally retarded person
2: a very stupid person
On Jan 9, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 03:42:35PM -0600, robert engels wrote:
If your index can fit in the IO cache, you should using a completely
different implementation...

You should be writing a sequential transaction log for add/update/
delete operations, and storing the entire index in memory
(RAMDirectory) - with periodic background flushes of the log.
That'll work too.
If you are running multiple processes (in KS), who is invoking them
(inetd or similar?), if not, and users are on the system, you can't
control what will happen with the IO cache...
See LUCENE-1458.

Marvin Humphrey

To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 6 of 22 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
postedJan 9, '09 at 7:12p
activeJan 19, '09 at 5:33p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase