[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-647?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12623379#action_12623379
]
Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-647:
-----------------------------------
bq. How will SolrCore#getCoreDescriptor() work. what will it return?
The original core descriptor (the original name).
bq. should the getCore() have synchronized block?
CoreContainer.getCore() does.
I removed CoreDescriptor.getCore()
bq. can we manage with a ConcurrentHashMap? A lock to be obtained per request
looks like too much of a price .
It could be reworked in the future, but a single synchronized map lookup per
top-level request is certainly nothing to worry about - there are probably at
least hundreds of synchronized calls per average request.
> Do SolrCore.close() in a refcounted way
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-647
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-647
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 1.3
> Reporter: Noble Paul
> Assignee: Yonik Seeley
> Fix For: 1.3
>
> Attachments: refcount_example.patch, solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch,
> solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch,
> solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch,
> solr-647.patch, solr-647.patch, SOLR-647.patch, SOLR-647.patch
>
>
> The method _SolrCore.close()_ directly closes the core . It can cause
> Exceptions for in-flight requests. The _close()_ method should just do a
> decrement on refcount and the actual close must happen when the last request
> being processed by that core instance is completed
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
