lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael McCandless" <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-845) If you "flush by RAM usage" then IndexWriter may over-merge
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:50:52 GMT
"Ning Li" <ning.li.li@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/26/07, Michael McCandless (JIRA) <jira@apache.org> wrote:
> > Ahhh, this is a very good point.  OK I won't deprecate "flushing by
> > doc count" and instead will allow either "flush by RAM usage" (default
> > to this?) or "flush by doc count".
> 
> Just want to clarify: It's either "flush and merge by byte size" or
> "flush and merge by doc count", right?

Good point, to keep the doc IDs identical, the merge policy must also be
identical.  But I think we should still default to "flush by RAM usage"
and "merge by segment size"?  And then developers who rely on doc IDs to
follow a specific controlled pattern (eg for ParallelReader) would set
the writer to flush by doc count and then set it to the "by doc count"
merge policy.

Mike

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


Mime
View raw message