[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6508?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14566535#comment-14566535
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-6508:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
We are not tracking openLocks anymore in MDW?
{quote}
Right, the AssertingLock in there was horrible. Its gone. We don't need sketchy
mocking layers that will hide bugs. Start simple with the minimal stuff is the
idea here.
{quote}
I love how you implemented the lock timeout (wrapping with a sleeper,
with awesome "This is not a good idea." javadocs) but I really think
we should just remove the timeout: I don't see a valid use case
... but we can do this separately.
{quote}
I don't want complaints about how i broke back compat behavior here, that
happened the last time i fixed bugs in locks. Thats why you get a sleeper by
default: I know how solr loves its sleeps!
> Simplify Directory/lock api
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6508
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6508
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Attachments: LUCENE-6508-deadcode1.patch, LUCENE-6508.patch,
> LUCENE-6508.patch
>
>
> See LUCENE-6507 for some background. In general it would be great if you can
> just acquire an immutable lock (or you get a failure) and then you close that
> to release it.
> Today the API might be too much for what is needed by IW.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
