[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12625054#action_12625054
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-753:
-------------------------------------------
bq. Is there a reason we don't do lazy allocation in clone() like FSIndexInput?
Yonik, do you mean BufferedIndexInput.clone (not FSIndexInput)?
I think once we fix NIOFSIndexInput to subclass from BufferedIndexInput, then
cloning should be lazy again. Jason are you working on this (subclassing from
BufferedIndexInput)? If not I can take it.
bq. Also, our finalizers aren't technically thread safe which could lead to a
double close in the finalizer
Hmmm... I'll update both FSDirectory and NIOFSDiretory's isOpen's to be
volatile.
> Use NIO positional read to avoid synchronization in FSIndexInput
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-753
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Store
> Reporter: Yonik Seeley
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: 2.4
>
> Attachments: FileReadTest.java, FileReadTest.java, FileReadTest.java,
> FileReadTest.java, FileReadTest.java, FileReadTest.java, FileReadTest.java,
> FSDirectoryPool.patch, FSIndexInput.patch, FSIndexInput.patch,
> LUCENE-753.patch, lucene-753.patch, lucene-753.patch
>
>
> As suggested by Doug, we could use NIO pread to avoid synchronization on the
> underlying file.
> This could mitigate any MT performance drop caused by reducing the number of
> files in the index format.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
