On Sep 22, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
>
> And yet, at the first SF Meetup, I recall having a discussion with
> Michael B. about this approach versus IR.reopen() that left me
> wondering which one is better, since, Lucene has, in fact, always
> been about incremental updates (since there are commercial systems
> out there that require complete re-indexing) and that getting
> IR.reopen to perform is just a matter of tuning one's application in
> regards to reads and writes vs. having to do all this work in the
> IndexWriter that now tightly couples the IndexReader to the
> IndexWriter.
FWIW, I still don't like the coupling of the two. I think it would be
better if IW allowed you to get a Directory (or some other appropriate
representation) representing the in memory segment that can then
easily be added to an existing Searcher/Reader. This would at least
decouple the two and instead use the common data structure they both
already share, i.e. the Directory. Whether this is doable or not, I
am not sure.
|