lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "jayson.minard" <>
Subject Re: DirectUpdateHandler2 threads pile up behind scheduleCommitWithin
Date Sun, 10 May 2009 17:54:05 GMT


I revamped the DirectUpdateHandler2 into DirectUpdateHandler3 in SOLR-1155,
probably ready enough for your review to see if locking makes sense for
current Lucene behavior.


Mike Klaas wrote:
> On 7-May-09, at 10:36 AM, jayson.minard wrote:
>> Does every thread really need to notify the update handler of the  
>> commit
>> interval/threshold being reached, or really just the first thread that
>> notices should send the signal, or better yet a background commit  
>> watching
>> thread so that no "foreground" thread has to pay attention at all.   
>> That is
>> assuming they wouldn't need to block like they are now for a reason  
>> I'm
>> likely unaware of...
> This is due to the way Lucene was designed (although recent  
> improvements in Lucene mean we can do better here).  See the recent  
> thread "Autocommit blocking adds?" on solr-user for a related  
> discussion.
> As the person who first wrote the multi-threaded-ness of DUH2, I'd be  
> very happy to promptly review any improvements made to it.
> -Mike

View this message in context:
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at

View raw message