Yeah, I agree Hoss - we shouldn't pull the rug in either case - if you could count on it before and its worked out well, its more of a hassle to push out a surprise than to keep the known behavior.
More of an aside from me ;) Chris Hostetter wrote: > : That is my opinion, too. Closing the readers should be done by the caller in > > I don't disagree with either of you, but... > > : a finally block and not automatically by the IW. I only wanted to confirm, > : that the behaviour of 2.9 did not change. Closing readers two times is not a > > ...i wanted to try and confirm that as well. if we conciously decide that > IndexWriter is going to *stop* closing all Readers that's fine with me, > but in the absence of a specific statement like that in the release notes > we should strive for no suprises. (that doesn't have to come in the form > of code changes, it can simply be an announcemnt on java-user and > documented cavet in the applicable code ... but as yet we don't have > confirmation that any behavior change exists. > > > -Hoss > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > -- - Mark http://www.lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
