lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Earwin Burrfoot <>
Subject Re: Proposal about Version API "relaxation"
Date Thu, 15 Apr 2010 19:12:09 GMT
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 23:07, DM Smith <> wrote:
> On 04/15/2010 03:04 PM, Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
>>> BTW Earwin, we can come up w/ a migrate() method on IW to accomplish
>>> manual migration on the segments that are still on old versions.
>>> That's not the point about whether optimize() is good or not. It is
>>> the difference between telling the customer to run a 5-day migration
>>> process, or a couple of hours. At the end of the day, the same
>>> migration code will need to be written whether for the manual or
>>> automatic case. And probably by the same developer which changed the
>>> index format. It's the difference of when does it happen.
>> Converting stuff is easier then emulating, that's exactly why I want a
>> separate tool.
>> There's no need to support cross-version merging, nor to emulate old APIs.
>> I also don't understand why offline migration is going to take days
>> instead of hours for online migration??
>> WTF, it's gonna be even faster, as it doesn't have to merge things.
> Will it be able to be used within a client application that creates and uses
> local indexes?
> I;m assuming it will be faster than re-indexing.

As I said earlier in the topic, it is obvious the tool has to have
both programmatic and command-line interfaces.
I will also reiterate - it only upgrades the index structurally. If
you changed your analyzers - that's your problem and you have to deal
with it.

Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (
Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423
ICQ: 104465785

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

View raw message