Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31936 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2009 17:26:35 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Apr 2009 17:26:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 68324 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2009 17:26:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 68238 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2009 17:26:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 68230 invoked by uid 99); 6 Apr 2009 17:26:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:26:34 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:26:33 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C6B234C003 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2085991496.1239038773013.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:26:13 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jason Rutherglen (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1313) Realtime Search In-Reply-To: <1125794672.1214154225042.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1313?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12696186#action_12696186 ] Jason Rutherglen commented on LUCENE-1313: ------------------------------------------ bq. So this has no external dependencies, right? Yes. {quote}I'd be very interested to compare (benchmark) this approach vs solely LUCENE-1516.{quote} Is the .alg using the NearRealtimeReader from LUCENE-1516 our best measure of realtime performance? {quote} the transactional restriction could/should layer on top of this performance optimization for near-realtime search? {quote} The transactional system should be able to support both methods. Perhaps a non-locking setting would allow the same RealtimeIndex class support both modes of operation? > Realtime Search > --------------- > > Key: LUCENE-1313 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1313 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: Index > Affects Versions: 2.4.1 > Reporter: Jason Rutherglen > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.9 > > Attachments: LUCENE-1313.patch, LUCENE-1313.patch, lucene-1313.patch, lucene-1313.patch, lucene-1313.patch, lucene-1313.patch > > > Realtime search with transactional semantics. > Possible future directions: > * Optimistic concurrency > * Replication > Encoding each transaction into a set of bytes by writing to a RAMDirectory enables replication. It is difficult to replicate using other methods because while the document may easily be serialized, the analyzer cannot. > I think this issue can hold realtime benchmarks which include indexing and searching concurrently. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org