Re: [PR] Finish port of WindowsDirectory and NativeUnixDirectory, #1342 [lucenenet]

["paulirwin (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

paulirwin commented on PR #1346:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/1346#issuecomment-4879167839

   I meant to reply earlier to your top-level review comment... replies below.
   
   > Based on the benchmarks, I am starting to wonder whether we should aim to use native calls (or at least `RandomAccess`) instead of `FileStream` for writes on all of our `FSDirectory` implementations, since upstream they simply used `FileChannel` (which is a thin layer over native calls). Although, whatever solution we come up with, we should aim for getting the durability patched (#894) above all else.
   
   I like this, but it will not change the public API, so it can be broken out as a separate issue (even for post-beta-19) as a perf optimization opportunity.
   
   > Shouldn't we add these native calls to our existing [native layer](https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/tree/e2e5d9738588d50f014aaa9c9559f5586b7cf0b8/src/Lucene.Net/Support/Native) so we can utilize them to make a backport of `RandomAccess` for .NET Framework and other things that we are better off using native code for?
   
   Same as above, I think this can be broken out separately as a possible post-beta-19 perf optimization opportunity. In this particular case, these calls are very OS-dependent just like they are upstream (hence the names of the directories), so there's no harm in them being alongside the OS-specific directory code for now. That would be an easy refactor later as part of this possible perf improvement as a separate issue/PR.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucenenet.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org