re-mapping lucene index

2015-02-10 Thread Vijay B
We use MMapdirectory impl. in our search application. Occasionally we need to do a full indexing by dropping entire directory contents. How does re-mapping work with MMapDirectory as the directory contents are going to replace with new ones? is this going to be seamless or an application restart

Re: re-mapping lucene index

2015-02-10 Thread Vijay B
searching and indexing apps run in diffrent jvms. we use lucene 4.7 and using the default openmode. For full indexing, we use java.io.File.delete() to recursively delete index directory contents. will remapping cause any issues in this case if I dont use options you suggested? On Tue, Feb 10,

Re: re-mapping lucene index

2015-02-10 Thread Michael McCandless
Just open a new IndexWriter with OpenMode.CREATE. It will replace the index. Or if you already have an IW open, use deleteAll. Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Vijay B vijay.nip...@gmail.com wrote: We use MMapdirectory impl. in our search

Re: re-mapping lucene index

2015-02-10 Thread Michael McCandless
It's fine if writer and reader are in separate JVMs. You really should not rm -rf yourself. It's better to let Lucene's do it, e.g. it's transactional at that point so that if your new IndexWriter (that deleted all docs) crashes before it could commit, the old index is still intact. It also

RE: re-mapping lucene index

2015-02-10 Thread Uwe Schindler
. Uwe - Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de -Original Message- From: Vijay B [mailto:vijay.nip...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 8:38 PM To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: re-mapping lucene index

Re: re-mapping lucene index

2015-02-10 Thread Vijay B
Appreciate it Mike. That answeres it all. BTW we use solaris. On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Michael McCandless luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote: It's fine if writer and reader are in separate JVMs. You really should not rm -rf yourself. It's better to let Lucene's do it, e.g. it's