the document count and the max doc ID should
>> >>>> > tell you something...
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Is it possible that you are updating existing docs
>> >>>> > rather than adding new ones?
>> >>>>
;> >> Thanks dor the input.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> 1. While the process is running, I do see the index files growing
> on
> >>>> disk
> >>>> >> and the time stamps changing. Should I see a change in size right
> after
&g
right after
>>>> >> killing the process, is that what you mean ?
>>>> >> 2. Yes, same directory is being used for indexing and search.
>>>> >> 3. Didn't try Luke, good idea. Though I wonder, the same code runs well
>>>> on
>>>
e time stamps changing. Should I see a change in size right
> after
> >>> >> killing the process, is that what you mean ?
> >>> >> 2. Yes, same directory is being used for indexing and search.
> >>> >> 3. Didn't try Luke, good idea. T
same directory is being used for indexing and search.
>>> >> 3. Didn't try Luke, good idea. Though I wonder, the same code runs well
>>> on
>>> >> Windows.
>>> >>
>>> >> Naama
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Jan 7,
gt;>
>> >> > Several questions:
>> >> > 1> are the index files larger after you kill your process?
>> >> >Or have the timestamps changed?
>> >> > 2> are you absolutely sure that your indexer, when you
>> >> >
rick Erickson >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > Several questions:
> >> > 1> are the index files larger after you kill your process?
> >> >Or have the timestamps changed?
> >> > 2> are you absolutely sure that your indexer, when
; > Or have the timestamps changed?
>> > 2> are you absolutely sure that your indexer, when you
>> > add documents, is pointing at the same directory your
>> > search is pointing to?
>> > 3> Have you gotten a copy of Luke and examined your
e directory your
> > search is pointing to?
> > 3> Have you gotten a copy of Luke and examined your index
> > to see if, perhaps, your documents aren't being added the
> > way you think they are?
> >
> > Erick
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2
> Erick
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Naama Kraus wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am using IndexWriter#commit() methods in my program to commit document
> > additions to the index. I do that once in a while, after a bunch of
> > documents were added. Since m
Luke and examined your index
to see if, perhaps, your documents aren't being added the
way you think they are?
Erick
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Naama Kraus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am using IndexWriter#commit() methods in my program to commit document
> additions to the
Hi,
I am using IndexWriter#commit() methods in my program to commit document
additions to the index. I do that once in a while, after a bunch of
documents were added. Since my indexing process is long, I want to make sure
I don't loose too many additions in case of a crash.
When runni
Hello Dipen,
I think what he meant is that if power is off the last transaction is
trashed, but your index is not.
Best.
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Dipen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hi michael,
> this is rather hard for me to understand, if a system loses power
> (electricity), how can
It's only if power is lost *after* the call to IndexWriter.commit()
has successfully returned, that the guarantee holds.
commit() does not return until all newly written and referenced files
in the index have been successfully fsync'd (and the OS does not
return from fsync until all bytes
hi michael,
this is rather hard for me to understand, if a system loses power
(electricity), how can it be ensured that fsync() call will happen at all,
this commit function relies on fsync() but what if OS doesnt have time or
power in this case to actually call fsync() and synchronize. I read ab
Hello,
Thanks a bunch Michael. Its been a long time I wanted to upgrade to
2.4. It seems major change has been done.
Best.
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Michael McCandless
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Oh and I just committed a fix to IndexWriter's javadocs -- commit(long) is a
> private met
Oh and I just committed a fix to IndexWriter's javadocs --
commit(long) is a private method that should never have been in the
javadocs. Thanks for raising this!
Mike
Cam Bazz wrote:
Hello,
What is the difference between flush in <2.4 and commit?
Also I have been looking over docs, an
There is no difference, unless your computer/OS crashes or loses power
shortly after you had call the method.
In that case, there's a big difference: commit() guarantees your index
will be intact (assuming the storage system holding your index was not
damaged) but with flush(), which does
Hello,
What is the difference between flush in <2.4 and commit?
Also I have been looking over docs, and they mention commit(long) but
there is no commit(long) method but only commit()
Best.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROT
19 matches
Mail list logo
