On the Lucene side, it seems to me that manually asking for a lock
clear is cleaner / safer than this automagic approach.
On 16 oct. 09, at 16:50, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Hello,
> Lucene does - in default LockManager implementation - a sort of "lock
> cleanup" at index creation: if it detects
Does that mean adding in a settings.xml profile?
/System/Library/Frameworks/
JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.6.0/Home/
?
I will update https://www.hibernate.org/422.html once I know.
On 16 oct. 09, at 17:12, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> Just to let y'all know
Hi,
yes, the property should be added to the profile you are activating when
building Core.
In the example on the wiki it should be within the 'standard-extra-repos'
profile.
My properties look like this:
/opt/java/repository.jboss.org
/System/Library/Frameworks/J
On 16 Oct 2009, at 15:50, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Hello,
> Lucene does - in default LockManager implementation - a sort of "lock
> cleanup" at index creation: if it detects a lock on the index at
> startup, this is cleared.
>
> Łukasz translated the exact same semantic on the Infinispan
> Dire
Sanne, please don't use closed mailing lists, emails are bounced back
and that's annoying.
PS: removing source sense's ML
On 16 oct. 09, at 16:50, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Hello,
> Lucene does - in default LockManager implementation - a sort of "lock
> cleanup" at index creation: if it detects
On 19 Oct 2009, at 08:16, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
> On the Lucene side, it seems to me that manually asking for a lock
> clear is cleaner / safer than this automagic approach.
Yeah, I agree with Emmanuel - a more explicit form would work better
IMO. Perhaps what you could do is something like
Sorry I'll try to explain myself better, I think there's some
confusion about what my problem is.
Javadoc for LockFactory.clearLock - which the interface of what we
have to implement - is about an explicit force-cleanup:
/**
* Attempt to clear (forcefully unlock and remove) the
* specified l
I would think you need a separate tx for the lifecycle of the lock.
On 19 Oct 2009, at 12:22, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> Sorry I'll try to explain myself better, I think there's some
> confusion about what my problem is.
>
> Javadoc for LockFactory.clearLock - which the interface of what we
> have
