[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13536385#comment-13536385
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-4246:
--------------------------------------------
bq. Can't we just decide (I think that's the 3rd time I'm proposing it) to
never wait for merges on close(), and keep close() committing changes?
I don't think we can never wait for merges on close.
That can easily lead to an accidental "denial of service attack on big merges",
which would be an awful trap. Ie, a big merge kicks off, but never has a
chance to finish because the app closes/opens new IWs frequently. Then every
IW that's opened will restart the merge, spend CPU/IO resources, only to abort
when the IW is closed.
I've never liked that close "hides" this wait-for-massive-merge to finish, but
I also don't like this "just abort the massive merge" solution: it would create
a nasty trap. I would prefer that it's explicit (abortMerges or
waitForMerges).
> Fix IndexWriter.close() to not commit or wait for pending merges
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4246
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4246
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Assignee: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.1
>
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
