Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Poor performance "race condition" in FieldSortedHitQueue
In-Reply-To: 
 <OF9D529309.F7DE059A-ON882571C6.00642C64-882571C6.006F2D56@il.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0608111136530.10034@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu>
References: 
 <OF9D529309.F7DE059A-ON882571C6.00642C64-882571C6.006F2D56@il.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

: ... right, thanks, now I see what you mean. In other words, IndexReader
: provides the ability to read/iterate terms and docs, but caching the term
: values per doc is for a higher layer - this way keeping IndexReader simpler
: and maintainable. So I guess Oliver can continue with the change as he
: proposed it.

if any "heavy" changes were to be made to the way FieldCaches refrences
are handled (ie; being able to specify which FieldCacheImpl you want to
use) it would make more sense to put that in the Searcher API ... but even
then it might make sense to use a WeakHashRef on the IndexReader since
multiple IndexSearchers can refrence the same IndexReader.


-Hoss


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org