> Could you minimize this to a small stand-alone program that does not work > as expected?
This will be hard, because of the bug only appearing after a couple of days or more and i'm starting to think that it is triggered by high data volumes. I'll try to minimize the code and serve more data to it. > Any particular reason why not using the same version in all 3? > There was a concurrency bug at some point, and after it was fixed, i got a night build to use until 3.5 official release. > Doron > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Mihai Caraman <caraman.mi...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > All packages used: core3.4, queries3.4, facet3.5. > > Once every 3 minutes I *refreshTax* and once per day I *reopenEveryting*. > > > > *InitWriters()* > > writer = new ThreadedIndexWriter > > taxWriter = new LuceneTaxonomyWriter > > // because the reader can't start if doesn't have a valid taxIndex > > directory > > taxWriter.commit(); > > > > *InitReaders()* > > reader = IndexReader.open(writer, false); > > taxReader = new LuceneTaxonomyReader > > > > *RefreshTax()* > > taxWriter.commit(); > > writer.commit(); > > reader = Singleton.reader.reopen(); > > taxReader.refresh(); > > > > *reopenEverything*() > > reader.close(); > > taxReader.close(); > > taxWriter.close(); > > writer.close(); > > initWriters(); > > initReaders(); > > > > I don't think the infostream from the taxWriter would do me any good. > > because the writer does he's job, he's not stopping from indexing, but > the > > taxReader doesn't have access to those new entries. > > >
