Re: Using same index definition for both async and sync indexing

Opened OAK-4641 for this enhancement Chetan Mehrotra On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Alex Parvulescu > wrote: >> sounds interesting, this looks like a good option. >> > > Now comes

Re: Using same index definition for both async and sync indexing

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Alex Parvulescu wrote: > sounds interesting, this looks like a good option. > Now comes the hard part ... what should be the name of this new interface ;) ContextualIndexEditorProvider? Chetan Mehrotra

Re: Using same index definition for both async and sync indexing

> So we can have a marker value to indicate empty agreed, we could have null, '' and/or 'default' basically map to the same idea: sync index. > And there we introduce something like IndexingContext which folds in > IndexUpdateCallback, indexing mode, index path, CommitInfo etc sounds

Re: Using same index definition for both async and sync indexing

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Alex Parvulescu wrote: > extend the current index definition > for the 'async' property and allow multiple values. That should work and looks like natural extension of the flag. Just that having empty value in array does not look good

Re: Using same index definition for both async and sync indexing

Hi, I don't have a clear proposal for the entire problem, but let me add a few thoughts to the info you provided. It looks like there are 2 problems we need to fix: first one is indexer being picked up by two threads (sync and async), second one is indexer needs to know if it is running in a sync