[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6519?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18061793#comment-18061793
]
Uwe Schindler commented on SOLR-6519:
-------------------------------------
The underlying implementation is not a FSDirectory and therefore you can't pass
a lock factory. The factory in Solr most likely just replicates this behaviour.
Sure you could modify Solr's factory to only accept "none" but that's a
different story.
> In trunk change Solr's DirectoryFactory.create method to take LockFactory
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6519
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6519
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Uwe Schindler
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 5.0, 6.0
>
> Attachments: SOLR-6519.patch, SOLR-6519.patch
>
>
> Because of NIO2 changes and the corresponding workaround, it is impossible
> now to create a Directory and "hope" that the lock factory directory is not
> created. Especially if you want some non-standard lock factory, this blows up.
> The problem is: The lock dir is now created in ctor. As workaround I made all
> factories set NoLockFactory initially through ctor (see SOLR-6518), but this
> is just a workaround for incorrect API design.
> In fact the main problem is just stupid: Why does protected
> CachingDirectoryFactory.create() not take the lock factory? I think its
> because of backwards compatibility, but with Solr 5.0 we can change this.
> In future we want to make the lock factory non-mutable in Directory, so this
> is an important change. In addition, injectLockFactory looks horrible, this
> code is a häckidy-hick-hack!
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
