That part is self understood. However as I describe the problem initially - and the use case is a very practical way of dealing with documents in real live - they change, we edit them, I don't want to run a batch re-indexing thing every night... I just wanted done on the spot. One instance IndexerSeacher it's the way to go I today agree but because it's reader doesn't detect the changes in the files because is not being used to do them it's pretty anoying don't you all thing ?
-------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Erick Erickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <1>. Every time you close/open a reader, you pay a significant penalty > to warm up caches, etc. You may have to do some tricky dancing > to coordinate among the sessions to be able to close/reopen > the reader to allow updates to show up though. > > Erick > > > On 3/5/07, Mohammad Norouzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Erick > > I am completely confused about this IndexReader. > > in my case, I have to keep the reader opened because of pagination of the > > result so I have to had a reader per session. the thing that baffled me is > > can only one reader service all the session at the same time? > > > > I mean > > 1- having one reader for all sessions and having a Hits for each session. > > 2- one reader per session. > > which one is right? > > > > On 3/5/07, Erick Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > There was quite a long discussion thread on this topic relatively > > > recently, try searching the archive for concurrence, perhaps > > > IndexReader, etc. > > > > > > The short take-away is that you should share a single instance > > > of the reader, since opening one is an expensive operation, and > > > the first searches you perform will incur some overhead while > > > underlying caches are built. You have to build in some mechanisms > > > for gracefully shutting it down when you need to re-open them if they > > > are being shared.... > > > > > > Erick > > > > > > > > > On 3/4/07, MC Moisei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Daniel, > > > > > > > > Thanks for replying. THe only reason I don't close my indexSearcher is > > > > that I got the "Too Many File Open Exception" and I decided to make my > > > > searcher static in the SearchService. > > > > > > > > If I do go and close then open a new one I may expose myself to some > > > > concurent access issues while people can update their files other can > > do > > > > the searches for those files ( My searcheables are files entities) > > > > > > > > Since the IndexSearcher has an underlying IndexReader I should use > > that > > > > one to handle the reads in the Interceptor but that won't do me too > > much > > > > good since I need certain methods that are no in IndexReader ( > > and BTW > > > > i thought I've mentioned that I use the IndexModifier that is a > > mixture > > > > of the IndexReader and IndexWriter ). > > > > > > > > Any ideas ? > > > > > > > > MC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Daniel Noll wrote: > > > > > MC Moisei wrote: > > > > >> Hi to all members of the user group! > > > > >> > > > > >> Let me get to my problem. I use Lucene in two different parts of > > the > > > > >> application. One is the SearchService and one is an AOP interceptor > > > > that > > > > >> intercepts any changes in the Searcheable entities. This last part > > is > > > > >> removing the document from the index and add the document again. > > > > >> > > > > >> That being said, here's my test case. > > > > >> > > > > >> My searcheable item has in content "apple banana" if I search for > > > apple > > > > >> or banana I get it back amoung the results. > > > > >> If I modify it and remove banana from content when I search for > > apple > > > > or > > > > >> banana I get same results as above (!?) > > > > >> If I restart my application so the IndexSearcher is recreated, I > > run > > > > the > > > > >> test above I only get my document if I search for apple - that > > leads > > > me > > > > >> to conclude that the IndexSearcher caches the results. > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't "cache" the results, but what happens is the underlying > > > > > IndexReader effectively sees no changes for its lifetime (this is > > > > > presumably for safety; since usually you don't want the index > > changing > > > > > underneath while trying to do queries.) > > > > > > > > > >> Is there a way to clear IndexSeacher when I do the reindexing ( I > > use > > > > >> IndexModifer for the AOP interceptor) ? > > > > > > > > > > Yep. Close the IndexSearcher and the IndexReader, and reopen them. > > > > > > > > > > If you need to do queries quite often then it probably makes sense > > to > > > > > do this only every now and then. > > > > > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Mohammad > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
