jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christoph Kiehl <ki...@subshell.com>
Subject Re: Jackrabbits own FileSystem and unit tests
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:56:54 GMT
Marcel Reutegger wrote:
> Christoph Kiehl wrote:
>> Ok. To get this working, you have to create at least one segment per 
>> transaction, right?
> not necessarily. as an optimization the current implementation uses the 
> redo.log to keep track of index modifications that were only done in 
> memory. this means that at the end of a transaction there won't 
> necessarily be a new index segment on disk.

But isn't it necessary for the index data to be committed to the database/pm to 
get a transactional index? I mean if you commit the index changes from the 
redo.log in a new transaction you don't really gain anything compared to the 
current solution regarding transactional index behavior, do you?

>> And index merging could be done in background?
> index merging *is* already done in the background.

Yes, of course.

>> Sounds really interesting. But if the blob values are cached locally 
>> they have to be downloaded on startup first before the index starts to 
>> be fast.
> correct.

Hm, for our case this would mean to download about 10GB on each restart :( Might 
take a while ;)


View raw message