Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A54810AB1 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 56237 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2013 17:55:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 55742 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2013 17:55:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 55730 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2013 17:55:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 17:55:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of simon.willnauer@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.48] (HELO mail-la0-f48.google.com) (209.85.215.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 17:55:34 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f48.google.com with SMTP id hi8so1618754lab.21 for ; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 10:55:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=yduF1wslanK8INowwLQxqmzDGQJPEow28zFeFrbOFOQ=; b=TACG+yeM8Talk2GXni5wqKvwKpaTpaLqA3fN2q8lLJm4/QTPSB/MnZ8dGW4Cuu0UOc P8tEsFXWah0zokn3mnLxbelm/ZDeYmmykEl+j6Be4WcrrqUSsohJNY03FkAlPkpgC29L m1FjRiXPv9Z6/J8e8+hcBaL+ulK23Z4PdwwaheI1z0wCOGKbs903ZCg6ZrsVhFSPs5eg hvAvnUK+eATFcGoqItnSdfNoJvVpfPIxnsrI9yTOijTcOVltPmuA7O5PCVhT2gIuRE8H 0Yj6dNla5LQeD+whyZe4qFwjDaQQdHKaxxCb4b83EL8RzgpyKgsImA7rEZAu5AnE7poM qlZQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.128.166 with SMTP id np6mr2018513lbb.7.1375379713200; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 10:55:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.44.67 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 10:55:13 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: simon.willnauer@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 19:55:13 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FlushPolicy and maxBufDelTerm From: Simon Willnauer To: "dev@lucene.apache.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org thanks for clarifying this - I agree the wording is tricky here and we should use the term "apply" here! sorry for the confusion! simon On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Michael McCandless wrote: > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Shai Erera wrote: >>> I think the doc is correct >> >> Wait, one of the docs is wrong. I guess according to what you write, it's >> FlushPolicy, as a new segment is not flushed per this setting? >> Or perhaps they should be clarified that the deletes are flushed == applied >> on existing segments? > > Ahh, right. OK I think we should fix FlushPolicy to say "deletes are > applied"? Let's try to leave the verb "flushed" to mean a new segment > is written to disk, I think? > >> I disabled reader pooling and I still don't see .del files. But I think >> that's explained due to there are no segments in the index yet. >> All documents are still in the RAM buffer, and according to what you write, >> I shouldn't see any segment cause of delTerms? > > Right! OK so that explains it. > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org