On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Shay Banon <kim...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am not sure that IndexWriterConfig is bad. Its nice to be able to set all > the upfront configurations in a single object and pass it to the > IndexWriter. And, have the IndexWriter allow for specific setters allowing > for real time changes (those should not be done through the > IndexWriterConfig). > The question is which real time changes are allowed or not. The fact that > they are separated (IndexWriterConfig, and real time setters) is good since > it allows to distinguish between what can be set when setting up an > IndexWriter, compared to what can be set in real time. We did not have this > distinction before the IndexWriterConfig was introduced. > This open the door for optimizations for things that can only be set when > constructing an IndexWriter. Usually, supporting real time changes can > hinder concurrency, while having parameters that are basically immutable > allows to optimize in this case. > -shay.banon >
I disagree that its good if things are separate... Instead of API confusion I think I would prefer a single method on IW that "best effort" tries to apply any "realtime" setters This way we can avoid constant deprecation and undeprecation between these APIs. Instead, whether something can be changed on the fly is only a documentation issue. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
