ards
> Mirko
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Januar 2010 17:12
> An: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: NFS, Stale File Handle Problem and my thoughts
>
> Yes, normal merging will cause
achricht-
> Von: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Januar 2010 16:14
> An: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: NFS, Stale File Handle Problem and my thoughts
>
> Right, it's only machine A that needs the deletion policy. All
eded files are taken from the
>> >> IndexDeletionPolicy, and deleted at 12:30. At this point the files to be
>> >> deleted should no longer be required by any IndexReader and can be
>> safely
>> >> deleted.
>> >>
>> >> So the IndexDeletionPolicy should be
t; >> Machine B has read only access.
> >>
> >> Would this be a valid setup? The only limitation is there is only ONE
> >> IndexWriter box, and multiple IndexReader boxes. Based on our
> requirements,
> >> this should fix very well. I really want to avoid s
this should fix very well. I really want to avoid some kind of index
>> replication between the boxes...
>>
>> Regards
>> Mirko
>>
>>
>>
>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>> Von: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
>> Gese
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Januar 2010 14:45
> An: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: NFS, Stale File Handle Problem and my thoughts
>
> Right, you just need to make a custom Ind
ween the boxes...
>
> Regards
> Mirko
>
>
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. Januar 2010 14:45
> An: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: NFS, Stale File Handle Problem and
Right, you just need to make a custom IndexDeletionPolicy. NFS makes
no effort to protect deletion of still-open files.
A simple approach is one that only deletes a commit if it's more than
XXX minutes/hours old, such that XXX is set higher than the frequency
that IndexReaders are guaranteed to h
java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: nfs mount problem
Actually this issue should be closed. I will close it.
As far as I know, Lucene should now work over NFS, except you will
have to make a custom deletion policy that works for your application.
Lucene had issues with NFS in three areas: lock
Actually this issue should be closed. I will close it.
As far as I know, Lucene should now work over NFS, except you will
have to make a custom deletion policy that works for your application.
Lucene had issues with NFS in three areas: locking, stale client-side
file caches and how NFS handles
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Like Mike already said and I had also experienced the same problem of
sharing the index accross the NFS, but now I am testing the Lucene with
lockless commit patch and till now I did not get any problem, also I
liked. But I am surely in afavour of havi
man, 13,.11.2006 kl. 12.02 -0500, skrev Michael McCandless:
> The quick answer is: NFS is still problematic in Lucene 2.0.
>
> The longer answer is: we'd like to fix this, but it's not fully fixed
> yet. You can see here:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-673
>
> for gory det
The quick answer is: NFS is still problematic in Lucene 2.0.
The longer answer is: we'd like to fix this, but it's not fully fixed
yet. You can see here:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-673
for gory details.
There are at least two different problems with NFS (spelled out in t
On Nov 13, 2006, at 8:10 AM, Øyvind Stegard wrote:
I've searched the list and have found many references to problems when
using Lucene over NFS. Mostly because of file-based locking, which
doesn't work all that well for many NFS installations. I'm under the
impression that the core locking logi
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the information!
Peter
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 5:49 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: NFS/iSCSI SAN with Lucene
>
>
> > I did a search
I did a search on the Lucene list archives, found a lot of posts about
the use of Lucene with NFS and how there are locking issues, but don't
see anybody coming to a real solution to this.
We are trying to fix this. Many people seem to hit it.
The current plan is to first decouple the Lockin
I did a search on the Lucene list archives, found a lot of posts about
the use of Lucene with NFS and how there are locking issues, but don't
see anybody coming to a real solution to this.
We are trying to fix this. Many people seem to hit it.
The current plan is to first decouple the Lockin
Thanks all for the info. Otis was correct, I'm just using NFS for
the space, not for multiple machines having access. If we ever have to
have multiple machines, we now know what problems we will need to deal
with.
As for performance of the NFS vs Local we will need to do some tests
and decide w
Vince Taluskie writes:
> Richard,
>
> In an earlier note, I mentioned using an Netapp R100 for storage of our
> indexes and content - so I can say that Lucene definitely works accessing
> over NFS. I think this is more for updating/merging the same indexes across
> multiple systems simultaneous
Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Le 18 mai 05, à 11:51, John Haxby a écrit :
I haven't tried this, but under Linux (at least), you can specify the
"nolock" parameter to make file locking appen locally. Of course,
this will make it impossible to use NFS to share the index among
several machines, but, as O
Richard,
In an earlier note, I mentioned using an Netapp R100 for storage of our
indexes and content - so I can say that Lucene definitely works accessing
over NFS. I think this is more for updating/merging the same indexes across
multiple systems simultaneously and once the indexes are there -
Le 18 mai 05, à 11:51, John Haxby a écrit :
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
I haven't used Lucene with NFS. My understanding is that the problem
is with lock files when they reside on the NFS server. Yes, you can
change the location of lock files with a system property, but if you
are using NFS to make t
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
I haven't used Lucene with NFS. My understanding is that the problem
is with lock files when they reside on the NFS server. Yes, you can
change the location of lock files with a system property, but if you
are using NFS to make the index accessible from multiple machines,
I haven't used Lucene with NFS. My understanding is that the problem
is with lock files when they reside on the NFS server. Yes, you can
change the location of lock files with a system property, but if you
are using NFS to make the index accessible from multiple machines, then
changing the lock f
24 matches
Mail list logo
