jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Guggisberg" <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: question regarding jackrabbit index implementation
Date Mon, 30 Jul 2007 08:44:47 GMT
hi ard,

On 7/30/07, Ard Schrijvers <a.schrijvers@hippo.nl> wrote:
> Since I do not get any responses, is nobody aware why the choice has been to create many
(configurable) persistent caches, and implement a merging strategy for it...?? Somebody must
know what the reason was/is?
>
> :-(

currently, a lot of people, incl. jackrabbit committers, are on summer
vacation.
you should take that into account when expecting replies.

cheers
stefan.

>
> Regards Ard
>
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have been looking at the
> > org.apache.jackrabbit.core.query.lucene implementation, and I
> > do not understand what the reason(s) for multiple persistent
> > indices has been (for one single workspace)?
> >
> > I do understand the choice for a VolatileIndex and a
> > PersistentIndex obviously, but I just can't get a grip on why
> > multiple persistent indices are created, and the lucene
> > segment similar merging algorithms are done on multiple
> > persistent indices? Is it done for performance technical reasons?
> >
> > Can somebody enlight me on the reasons and benefits of the
> > multiple Persistent indices per workspace (I am ofcourse sure
> > there are good reasons, but I just can't seem to be able to
> > grasp it yet :-) )?
> >
> > thanks in advance,
> >
> > Regards Ard
> >
> > --
> >
> > Hippo
> > Oosteinde 11
> > 1017WT Amsterdam
> > The Netherlands
> > Tel  +31 (0)20 5224466
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > a.schrijvers@hippo.nl / ard@apache.org / http://www.hippo.nl
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>

Mime
View raw message