Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: <1780456961.1245953947336.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Shai Erera (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1707) Don't use ensureOpen() excessively
 in IndexReader and IndexWriter
In-Reply-To: <1523185665.1245551767331.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1707?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12724169#action_12724169 ] 

Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-1707:
------------------------------------

bq. Patch looks good; thanks Shai! 

Note that decRef() sets closed=true if refCount = 0. This will protect against the other bug (calling close() then decRef() or vice versa). So if you don't want it there, we should remove it before committing.

bq. so I think we should make it un-volatile; I'll change it before committing.

If we change refCount to not volatile, is this patch still needed? I.e., what's wrong w/ checking in ensureOpen if refCount <= 0, same as before?

bq. But too many calls to decRef is a real bug and I think we shouldn't mask/delay it.

That would not be possible, since decRef() asserts refCount > 0 (and asserts are enabled in tests) and calls ensureOpen(). So calling decRef() twice in a raw would hit either an assert exception (tests) or ACE (assertions disabled). I think?

> Don't use ensureOpen() excessively in IndexReader and IndexWriter
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1707
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1707
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Index
>            Reporter: Shai Erera
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1707.patch, LUCENE-1707.patch
>
>
> A spin off from here: http://www.nabble.com/Excessive-use-of-ensureOpen()-td24127806.html.
> We should stop calling this method when it's not necessary for any internal Lucene code. Currently, this code seems to hurt properly written apps, unnecessarily.
> Will post a patch soon

-- 
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