lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Rutherglen (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Updated: (LUCENE-2312) Search on IndexWriter's RAM Buffer
Date Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:12:27 GMT


Jason Rutherglen updated LUCENE-2312:

    Comment: was deleted

(was: I'm hitting a weird error where after executing a ram buf term docs iteration, adding
some docs, then closing the the DWs and the writer, there's an exception which indicates some
unknown (to me) state was modified because of the term docs iteration.  Or maybe it's obvious?

org.apache.lucene.index.CorruptIndexException: docs out of order (-2147483648 <= 2147483647
	at org.apache.lucene.index.FormatPostingsDocsWriter.addDoc(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.FreqProxTermsWriter.appendPostings(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.FreqProxTermsWriter.flush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.TermsHash.flush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.DocInverter.flush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.DocFieldProcessor.flush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.flush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(
	at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.closeInternal(

> Search on IndexWriter's RAM Buffer
> ----------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-2312
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Search
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.1
>            Reporter: Jason Rutherglen
>            Assignee: Michael Busch
>             Fix For: 3.1
> In order to offer user's near realtime search, without incurring
> an indexing performance penalty, we can implement search on
> IndexWriter's RAM buffer. This is the buffer that is filled in
> RAM as documents are indexed. Currently the RAM buffer is
> flushed to the underlying directory (usually disk) before being
> made searchable. 
> Todays Lucene based NRT systems must incur the cost of merging
> segments, which can slow indexing. 
> Michael Busch has good suggestions regarding how to handle deletes using max doc ids.
> The area that isn't fully fleshed out is the terms dictionary,
> which needs to be sorted prior to queries executing. Currently
> IW implements a specialized hash table. Michael B has a
> suggestion here: 

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:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message