lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nader Henein <>
Subject Re: Atomicity in Lucene operations
Date Fri, 15 Oct 2004 21:20:09 GMT
We use Lucene over 4 replicated indecies and we have to maintain 
atomicity on deletion and updates with multiple fallback points. I'll 
send you the right up, it's too big to CC the entire board.

nader henein

Christian Rodriguez wrote:

>Hello guys,
>I need additions and deletions of documents to the index to be ATOMIC
>(they either happen to completion or not at all).
>On top of this, I need updates (which I currently implement with a
>deletion of the document followed by an addition) to be ATOMIC and
>DURABLE (once I return from the "update" function its because the
>operation happened to completion and stays in the index).
>Notice that I dont really need all the ACID properties for all the operations.
>I have tried to solve the problem by using the Lucene + BDB package
>written by Andi Vajda and using transactions, but the BDB database
>gets corrupted if I insert random System.exit() to simulate a crash of
>the application before aborting or commiting transactions.
>So I have two questions:
>1. Has anyone been able to use the Lucene + BDB WITH transactions and
>simulate random crashes at different points in the process of addding
>items and found it to be robust (specially, have you been able to
>always recover after a crash, with uncommited txns rolled back and
>commited ones present in the DB)?
>2. Can anyone suggest other solutions (beside using BDB) that may
>work? For example: are any of these operations already atomic in
>Lucene (using an FSDirectory)?
>Thanks for any help you can give me!
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message