lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Rutherglen" <jason.rutherg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: IndexReader.isDeleted synchronization
Date Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:05:33 GMT
Should we do a read-only reader as part of the clone patch?  Sounds very
similar.  Also sounds like the delegate model will work best instead of
creating a SegmentReader subclass.

On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Michael McCandless <
lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:

>
> But I think you still need to synchronize, because the first thread that
> does a deletion needs to create the deletedDocs BitVector and others need to
> wait while that's happening?
>
> I think [eventually] getting to a read-only reader is the best approach (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1030).
>
> Mike
>
> Jason Rutherglen wrote:
>
>  A possible solution to the IndexReader.isDeleted synchronization is to
>> have a delegate class that is different depending on the Java version.  For
>> Java 1.4 the class defaults to the synchronization used now.  A Java 1.5
>> version would use a volatile deletedDocs attribute.  This would provide a
>> backwards compatible solution and a solution for Java versions with volatile
>> working that can avoid the use of synchronized.
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
View raw message