I am using the RMI RemoteSearchable. I don't use a central RMI registry for the cluster (it's not particularly beneficial to do so), so I have had none of the problems described above. It just works out of the box.
Why not work towards RemoteSearchable instead of Searchable extending java.rmi.Remote? Cheers, Anthony PS: I would happily upgrade to the Hadoop RPC version of RemoteSearchable that was discussed here earlier if it is moved into contrib. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:12 AM, mark harwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>since not many people, I think, even use the RMI stuff > > I certainly binned RMI in my distributed work. > It just would not reliably stop/restart cleanly in my experience - despite > following all the RMI guidelines for clean shutdowns. > > I'd happily see all RMI dependencies banished from core. > > Cheers > Mark > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Sent: Friday, 26 September, 2008 17:01:25 > Subject: Re: RMI, Searchable and RemoteSearchable > > Right, I think we could mark the RMI stuff on Searchable as deprecated > and note that it will be moved in 3.0. > > I will open a JIRA. > > > On Sep 26, 2008, at 11:57 AM, DM Smith wrote: > >> Grant Ingersoll wrote: >>> Came across: >>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fgroup%2Fandroid-developers%2Fbrowse_thread%2Fthread%2F601329551a87e601%2Fcd0919ce891b4a26%3Flnk%3Dgst%26q%3Dlucene&ei=zNzcSPHCF4yI1ga61YiTBA&usg=AFQjCNECrBnNPBkxI4I0EbIzI-mNp3S4YA&sig2=4sDMmwa9Mrk38Nla_ULtOg >>> >>> The gist of it is, that on Android doesn't provide the RMI >>> package. Thus, Lucene core can't work on Android b/c of Searchable >>> extending java.rmi.Remote. >>> >>> This has always seemed a little weird to me. I'm no RMI expert, >>> but couldn't we drop the extension on Searchable, and add it to >>> RemoteSearchable, and then move RemoteSearchable and all the RMI >>> stuff to a separate contrib? This, in my view, would be consistent >>> with keeping core, core, since not many people, I think, even use >>> the RMI stuff and it certainly isn't required in most cases. >>> >>> I haven't looked into what would break in doing it, so it is just a >>> suggestion at this point. Seems like it could be "mostly" back- >>> compatible, though, since we would just be requiring someone to get >>> the new JAR, unless of course they implemented their own extension >>> of Searchable that relied on the Remote marker interface. >>> >>> Thoughts? >> >> If done, it should be done soon. Once we get to 2.9/3.0 we are kind >> of stuck for a long time. >> >> -- DM >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
