(extracted from issue 665 (turned to be non related to that issue).) In NFS or other shared fs situations, Locks are maintained in a specified folder, but a lock file name is derived from the full path of the index dir, actually the canonical name of this dir. So, if the same index is accessed by two machines, the <drive> / <mount> / <fs> root of that index dir must be named the same in all the machines on which Lucene is invoked to access/maintain that index.
Since File.getCanonicalPath() is system dependent, and since sometimes even for the same type of OS the mount names differ, Lucene has the setLockPrefix() API that allows users to configure locks prefix path in each machine. This seems like a source for possible problems, when users mis configure their lock prefixes. - if the index path was not configured correctly, the index would not be found, and this is likely to be found and fixed pretty soon. But if lock path prefixes are misconfigured, chances are that the index would get corrupted. This would be avoided if index locks are maintained in the index folder. I searched the lists for previous discussions on this 'design decision' - i.e. where the index locks reside - found none. Wouldn't it simplify matters to have the locks in the index dir? Any disadvantages of this? Thanks, Doron --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
