dsmiley commented on PR #2395: URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/2395#issuecomment-2050095834
I don't like the complexity in this URP relating to tolerance of where the URP is placed in the chain; I'd feel better if the URP were simplified from that concern and we expect the user to place it at an appropriate spot. We don't have complexity like that elsewhere and/or I argue it's not the right approach. I sympathize with why an URP feels right. Okay. On each `addDoc`, don't we just need to do the check on the current SolrIndexSearcher but remember who the searcher was so that the next `addDoc` can see it's the same searcher and if so don't do the check? It'd need to cache the searcher reference for the instance equality; use a `WeakReference` so we allow the searcher to close & GC. If we do this, we don't need a commit event listener, thus don't need an additional component / confusing interaction complexity. Don't get the SolrIndexSearcher from the request (we don't want a per-request cache instance), get it from the SolrCore so we see a possibly evolving SolrIndexSearcher. -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@solr.apache.org
