lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Ganyo <scott.ga...@eTapestry.com>
Subject RE: IndexReader.lastModified() not correct
Date Thu, 08 Aug 2002 14:23:54 GMT
I believe that would only needlessly complicate the API and confuse
developers.  The truth is that the method is broken.  Arguing that the
method is only broken under certain circumstances is just trying to avoid
that reality.  Why do you want to do that?

Scott

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Halácsy Péter [mailto:halacsy.peter@axelero.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 9:11 AM
> To: Lucene Developers List
> Subject: RE: IndexReader.lastModified() not correct
> 
> 
> Scott,
> IndexReader.lasModified() returns wrong value if and only if 
> documents were deleted. if you don't want to reopen searcher 
> on deletes you can use the old code.
> 
> can't we mix the two solutions? 
> IndexReader.lastModified(boolean dels)
> 
> if dels is true -> returns the time when a document was added 
> or deleted
> if dels is false -> return the time when the last document was added
> 
> peter
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Ganyo [mailto:scott.ganyo@eTapestry.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 4:04 PM
> > To: 'Lucene Developers List'
> > Subject: RE: IndexReader.lastModified() not correct
> > 
> > 
> > -1.  Now that we've verified that Windows won't work with 
> > this proposal
> > without additional checks (and I *really* hate OS-specific 
> > checks in Java),
> > I don't think this would be a good idea.
> > 
> > What about the solution that I posted?  It doesn't seem like 
> > so all that
> > much work now that I'm not using the locks...
> > 
> > Scott
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Doug Cutting [mailto:cutting@lucene.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 1:09 PM
> > > To: Lucene Developers List
> > > Subject: Re: IndexReader.lastModified() not correct
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Looks correct to me, but it's a pain to have to do so much 
> > > work to check 
> > > this.
> > > 
> > > I wonder if we should instead add a 
> > Directory.lastModified() method. 
> > > Both the "segments" file and the .del files are installed with 
> > > Directory.renameFile().  On both Unix and Win32, file 
> > > renaming updates 
> > > the directory's last modified time, so FSDirectory could 
> > > implement this 
> > > with File.lastModified() on its directory, and it wouldn't 
> > be hard to 
> > > implement this for RAMDirectory.
> > > 
> > > Thoughts?
> > > 
> > > Doug
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> > > <mailto:lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: 
> > > <mailto:lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > 
> > 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
<mailto:lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message