Correct - changing SegmentReader would be best, but in the past, getting proposed patches included has been slower than expected. So, by making the SegmentReader more easily subclassed (which should hopefully get approved quicker), I can still have a "build" of Lucene that does not require patching any files. (just including classes in the appropriate package to access package level vars/methods).
I can do everything needed (without subclassing) if there was a package/public accessor to the segment "name". -----Original Message----- From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 5:44 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: SegmentReader changes? Robert Engels wrote: > In implementing the 'reopen()' method SegmentReader needs to be subclassed > in order to support 'refreshing' the deleted documents. Why subclass? Why not simply change SegmentReader? It's not a public class at present, and making it a public class would be a bigger change than should be required to implement reopen. But perhaps I just don't yet understand how you intend to implement re-open. I think I'd implement it as something that inquired whether the deletions have changed, and if they have, clone the SegmentReader, re-opening all files, but only re-reading the deletions. Doug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
