: I suggest to use reader.directory() instead of reader as key for the : WeakHashMap. This way multiple IndexSearcher/IndexReacher instances would : share the cache.
setting aside discussion of why you should/shouldn't use a single IndexReader, or why the various places in the Lucene code base (like CachingWrapperFilter) that maintain caches using WeakHashMaps *were* built using the IndexReader as the key instead of reader.directory(), there are two fairly practical reasons why it would be a bad idea to try and do this... 1) there is a semi-articulated goal of moving away from "under the coveres" weakref caching to more explicit and controllable caching ... it's not such a big deal in this case since it only comes into play if the user uses th eclass -- but it would still be nice if user code had a way to actually monitor/manipulate the cache. (it's a much bigger issue with things like FieldCache, see also LUCENE-831) 2) IndexReader implementations are not currently (and have never really been) required to return anything useful from the directory() method ... in the trunk, classes like MultiReader will throw an UnSupOpEx if directory() is called. in older versions of Lucene, MultiReader would return the directory of the first sub IndexReader it was using -- which would result in some pretty frustrating cache key collisions if you tried to use the directory instead of the IndexReader itself. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
