lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Earwin Burrfoot <>
Subject Re: Getting fsync out of the loop
Date Thu, 08 Apr 2010 22:21:04 GMT
> But, IW doesn't let you "hold on to" checkpoints... only to commits.
> Ie SnapshotDP will only "see" actual commit/close calls, not
> intermediate checkpoints like a random segment merge completing, a
> flush happening, etc.
> Or... maybe you would in fact call commit frequently from the main
> threads (but with fsync disabled), and then your DP holds onto these
> "fake commits", periodically picking one of them to do the "real"
> fsync ing?
Yeah, that's exactly what I tried to describe in my initial post :)

>>>> I'm just playing around with stupid idea. I'd like to have NRT
>>>> look-alike without binding readers and writers. :)
>>> I see... well binding durability & visibility will always be costly.
>>> This is why Lucene decouples them (by making NRT readers available).
>> My experiments do the same, essentially.
>> But after I understood that to perform deletions IW has to load term indexes
>> anyway, I'm almost ready to give up and go for intertwined IW/IR mess :)
> Hey if you really think it's a mess, post a patch that cleans it up :)
Uh oh. Let me finish current one, first. Second - I don't know yet how
this should look like.
Something along the lines of deletions/norms writers being extracted
from segment reader
and reader pool being made external to IW??

Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (
Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423
ICQ: 104465785

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message