lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael McCandless (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5570) FSDirectory's fsync() is lenient
Date Thu, 03 Apr 2014 21:35:19 GMT


Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5570:

+1, new patch looks great; I agree we can decouple the two issues.

> FSDirectory's fsync() is lenient
> --------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-5570
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: core/store
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>         Attachments: LUCENE-5570.patch, LUCENE-5570_zerobyte.patch
> This method has a lot of problems:
> 1. it tracks 'stale files' as it writes (this seems pointless), and only actually fsyncs
the intersection of that 'stale files' and the filenames passed as argument to sync(). So
any bogus names passed to sync() are just silently ignored
> 2. if "something bad happens" (e.g. two indexwriters/dirs on the same path, or some other
shenanigans), and the file is actually in stale files, but was say actually deleted on the
filesystem, the underlying fsync() call will create a new 0-byte file and fsync that.
> In my opinion we should do none of this. we should throw exceptions when this stuff is

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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

View raw message