On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Shai Erera <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think the doc is correct > > Wait, one of the docs is wrong. I guess according to what you write, it's > FlushPolicy, as a new segment is not flushed per this setting? > Or perhaps they should be clarified that the deletes are flushed == applied > on existing segments?
Ahh, right. OK I think we should fix FlushPolicy to say "deletes are applied"? Let's try to leave the verb "flushed" to mean a new segment is written to disk, I think? > I disabled reader pooling and I still don't see .del files. But I think > that's explained due to there are no segments in the index yet. > All documents are still in the RAM buffer, and according to what you write, > I shouldn't see any segment cause of delTerms? Right! OK so that explains it. Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
