[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10482?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17523660#comment-17523660
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-10482:
----------------------------------------------------------
Commit 766c08e475ba31e2f5b7e1cf491cdacbe276ab67 in lucene's branch
refs/heads/branch_9x from Gautam Worah
[ https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene.git;h=766c08e475b ]
LUCENE-10482 Bug Fix: Don't use Instant.now() as prefix for the temp dir name
(#814)
* Don't use Instant.now() as prefix for the temp dir name
* spotless
> Allow users to create their own DirectoryTaxonomyReaders with empty
> taxoArrays instead of letting the taxoEpoch decide
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-10482
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10482
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: modules/facet
> Affects Versions: 9.1
> Reporter: Gautam Worah
> Priority: Minor
> Time Spent: 8h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> I was experimenting with the taxonomy index and {{DirectoryTaxonomyReaders}}
> in my day job where we were trying to replace the index underneath a reader
> asynchronously and then call the {{doOpenIfChanged}} call on it.
> It turns out that the taxonomy index uses its own index based counter (the
> {{{}taxonomyIndexEpoch{}}}) to determine if the index was opened in write
> mode after the last time it was written and if not, it directly tries to
> reuse the previous {{taxoArrays}} it had created. This logic fails in a
> scenario where both the old and new index were opened just once but the index
> itself is completely different in both the cases.
> In such a case, it would be good to give the user the flexibility to inform
> the DTR to recreate its {{{}taxoArrays{}}}, {{ordinalCache}} and
> {{{}categoryCache{}}} (not refreshing these arrays causes it to fail in
> various ways). Luckily, such a constructor already exists! But it is private
> today! The idea here is to allow subclasses of DTR to use this constructor.
> Curious to see what other folks think about this idea.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
