From dev-return-23730-apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive=jackrabbit.apache.org@jackrabbit.apache.org Tue Jun 09 14:21:14 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 32064 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2009 14:21:14 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Jun 2009 14:21:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 40298 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jun 2009 14:21:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 40232 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jun 2009 14:21:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 40224 invoked by uid 99); 9 Jun 2009 14:21:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:21:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.18.2.18] (HELO exprod7og120.obsmtp.com) (64.18.2.18) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:21:15 +0000 Received: from source ([209.85.218.213]) by exprod7ob120.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSi5vxOCpUyQAkKb/I90WUAuofKnoUIsw@postini.com; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:20:54 PDT Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so1177bwz.37 for ; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:20:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.103.133 with SMTP id k5mr158936fao.23.1244557252156; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:20:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <91f3b2650905190025h2635a41fg18933726cd12e672@mail.gmail.com> <91f3b2650905290912t5b0a7832m778d84953737ad7b@mail.gmail.com> <91f3b2650906090201r7b812692x6568a3b8d3c22333@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 16:20:52 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Reindexing a workspace ... From: Bart van der Schans To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 3:48 PM, K=D6LL Claus wrote: > hi (thomas), > > your post was clear thanks for the info ... > ok the lucene index is consistent but you will not get a snapshot from th= e repository > as bart wrote. > > I see some problems with barts solution .. > if you have a large repository a write lock that runs hours is not good > but maybe some others have good ideas =A0... Of course, but it depends on your definition of large. For example dumping 12 GB of data to disk from mysql will take something like half an hour. Or in other terms that's about 1.000.000 node budles and about 4.500.000 version bundles. Running for half an hour in read only in low traffic hours is imo quite acceptable in a lot of environments. > > i have tested the environment as you mentioned with the cluster and it wo= rks fine at the > moment for us because we can re-index the backup cluster in the backgroun= d if we get > a crash ... hopefully not :-) Keep in mind that re-indexing can take quite a lot of time. IIRC a full re-index of the repository mentioned above took somewhere between 6-12 hours. Regards, Bart