You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Karl Wettin (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2009/10/05 18:22:31 UTC
[jira] Created: (LUCENE-1948) Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
-----------------------------------
Key: LUCENE-1948
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Task
Components: contrib/*
Affects Versions: 2.9
Reporter: Karl Wettin
Assignee: Karl Wettin
Fix For: 3.0
http://markmail.org/message/j6ip266fpzuaibf7
I suppose that should have been suggested before 2.9 rather than
after...
There are at least three reasons to why I want to do this:
The code is based on the behaviour or the Directory IndexWriter as of
2.3 and I have not been touching it since then. If there will be
changes in the future one will have to keep IIW in sync, something
that's easy to forget.
There is no locking which will cause concurrent modification
exceptions when accessing the index via searcher/reader while
committing.
It use the old token stream API so it has to be upgraded in case it
should stay.
The java- and package level docs have since it was committed been
suggesting that one should consider using II as if it was immutable
due to the locklessness. My suggestion is that we make it immutable
for real.
Since II is ment for small corpora there is very little time lost by
using the constructor that builts the index from an IndexReader. I.e.
rather than using InstantiatedIndexWriter one would have to use a
Directory and an IndexWriter and then pass an IndexReader to a new
InstantiatedIndex.
Any objections?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [jira] Created: (LUCENE-1948) Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
Posted by DM Smith <dm...@gmail.com>.
On 10/05/2009 12:22 PM, Karl Wettin (JIRA) wrote:
> Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1948
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: contrib/*
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Karl Wettin
> Assignee: Karl Wettin
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> http://markmail.org/message/j6ip266fpzuaibf7
>
> I suppose that should have been suggested before 2.9 rather than
> after...
>
There will be a 2.9.1 for bug fixes. Consider adding the deprecation as
a bug fix.
-- DM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-1948) Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1948:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: (was: 3.0)
3.1
I move this to 3.1. The writer was already transformed to the new TokenStream API (not really effective, but works). We can deprecate it it 3.1 if needed.
> Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1948
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: contrib/*
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Karl Wettin
> Assignee: Karl Wettin
> Fix For: 3.1
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1948.patch
>
>
> http://markmail.org/message/j6ip266fpzuaibf7
> I suppose that should have been suggested before 2.9 rather than
> after...
> There are at least three reasons to why I want to do this:
> The code is based on the behaviour or the Directory IndexWriter as of
> 2.3 and I have not been touching it since then. If there will be
> changes in the future one will have to keep IIW in sync, something
> that's easy to forget.
> There is no locking which will cause concurrent modification
> exceptions when accessing the index via searcher/reader while
> committing.
> It use the old token stream API so it has to be upgraded in case it
> should stay.
> The java- and package level docs have since it was committed been
> suggesting that one should consider using II as if it was immutable
> due to the locklessness. My suggestion is that we make it immutable
> for real.
> Since II is ment for small corpora there is very little time lost by
> using the constructor that builts the index from an IndexReader. I.e.
> rather than using InstantiatedIndexWriter one would have to use a
> Directory and an IndexWriter and then pass an IndexReader to a new
> InstantiatedIndex.
> Any objections?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-1948) Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
Posted by "Karl Wettin (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Karl Wettin updated LUCENE-1948:
--------------------------------
Attachment: LUCENE-1948.patch
> Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1948
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: contrib/*
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Karl Wettin
> Assignee: Karl Wettin
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1948.patch
>
>
> http://markmail.org/message/j6ip266fpzuaibf7
> I suppose that should have been suggested before 2.9 rather than
> after...
> There are at least three reasons to why I want to do this:
> The code is based on the behaviour or the Directory IndexWriter as of
> 2.3 and I have not been touching it since then. If there will be
> changes in the future one will have to keep IIW in sync, something
> that's easy to forget.
> There is no locking which will cause concurrent modification
> exceptions when accessing the index via searcher/reader while
> committing.
> It use the old token stream API so it has to be upgraded in case it
> should stay.
> The java- and package level docs have since it was committed been
> suggesting that one should consider using II as if it was immutable
> due to the locklessness. My suggestion is that we make it immutable
> for real.
> Since II is ment for small corpora there is very little time lost by
> using the constructor that builts the index from an IndexReader. I.e.
> rather than using InstantiatedIndexWriter one would have to use a
> Directory and an IndexWriter and then pass an IndexReader to a new
> InstantiatedIndex.
> Any objections?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1948) Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
Posted by "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12776132#action_12776132 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1948:
---------------------------------------
How about this, deprecate or not? I want to do this as soon as possible before 3.0 comes out.
> Deprecating InstantiatedIndexWriter
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1948
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1948
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: contrib/*
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Karl Wettin
> Assignee: Karl Wettin
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1948.patch
>
>
> http://markmail.org/message/j6ip266fpzuaibf7
> I suppose that should have been suggested before 2.9 rather than
> after...
> There are at least three reasons to why I want to do this:
> The code is based on the behaviour or the Directory IndexWriter as of
> 2.3 and I have not been touching it since then. If there will be
> changes in the future one will have to keep IIW in sync, something
> that's easy to forget.
> There is no locking which will cause concurrent modification
> exceptions when accessing the index via searcher/reader while
> committing.
> It use the old token stream API so it has to be upgraded in case it
> should stay.
> The java- and package level docs have since it was committed been
> suggesting that one should consider using II as if it was immutable
> due to the locklessness. My suggestion is that we make it immutable
> for real.
> Since II is ment for small corpora there is very little time lost by
> using the constructor that builts the index from an IndexReader. I.e.
> rather than using InstantiatedIndexWriter one would have to use a
> Directory and an IndexWriter and then pass an IndexReader to a new
> InstantiatedIndex.
> Any objections?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org