Oh, and one more thing. Deleted docs is a sub case, with NRT, most people will almost always add docs as well... . So it is still not really usable for field cache, right?
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Shay Banon <kim...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just saw that you opened a case for that. I think that its important in > your test case to also test for object identity, not just equals. This is > because the IndexReader (or the FieldCacheKey) are used as keys in weak hash > maps, which uses identity (==) equality for keys. > > If FieldCacheKey is supposed to represent the key by which index readers > should be tested for "equality" (for example, it will be used in the > CachingWrapperFilter), and not the index reader itself, then I think it > should be renamed. What do you think? I am just looking now at what it does, > its new... > > -shay.banon > > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Yonik Seeley > <yo...@lucidimagination.com>wrote: > >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:00 PM, Shay Banon <kim...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Great, so I am not imagining things this late into the night ... ;), not >> so >> > great, since using NRT with field cache (like sorting) or caching >> filters, >> > or anything that caches based on IndexReader not really an option. This >> > makes NRT very problematic to use in a real application. >> >> NRT is still pretty new :-) And I do believe this is a bug, so we'll >> get it fixed. >> It's not actually a problem for FieldCache though - it no longer keys >> on the reader directly (if deleted docs are the only things that have >> changed, the FieldCache entry can still be shared). >> >> -Yonik >> http://www.lucidimagination.com >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> >
