[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2575?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12907624#action_12907624
]
Jason Rutherglen commented on LUCENE-2575:
------------------------------------------
I see the stream as an argument to the writeByte method, however I only see 0
or 1 being passed in for freq and prox respectively.
I'm not sure how we can implement the linked slices concept concurrently
without pre-allocating 4 bytes at the end of each slice for the forwarding
address. We would be able to go back to byte[]s that are readonly, copy,
rewrite the forwarding address(es), and then synchronously flush the rewritten
byte[]s back to the readonly list. We could have a switch that turns the
auto-address writing on or off if a user does not plan on using realtime search.
> Concurrent byte and int block implementations
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2575
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2575
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: Realtime Branch
> Reporter: Jason Rutherglen
> Fix For: Realtime Branch
>
>
> The current *BlockPool implementations aren't quite concurrent.
> We really need something that has a locking flush method, where
> flush is called at the end of adding a document. Once flushed,
> the newly written data would be available to all other reading
> threads (ie, postings etc). I'm not sure I understand the slices
> concept, it seems like it'd be easier to implement a seekable
> random access file like API. One'd seek to a given position,
> then read or write from there. The underlying management of byte
> arrays could then be hidden?
--
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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
