[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8962?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17142184#comment-17142184
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-8962:
-----------------------------------------
I can reproduce this every 10 iterations. Funny enough I can't in my IDE only
when I repeatedly run it on the CMD. This line reproduces for me quite
frequently:
{noformat}
ant test -Dtestcase=TestIndexWriter -Dtests.method=testRandomOperations
-Dtests.seed=83A78A6E34594E08 -Dtests.nightly=true -Dtests.slow=true
-Dtests.badapples=true -Dtests.locale=teo-KE
-Dtests.timezone=Antarctica/Rothera -Dtests.asserts=true
-Dtests.file.encoding=ISO-8859-1
{noformat}
I also checked if it's related to calling mergeFinished multiple times but it
doesn't
> Can we merge small segments during refresh, for faster searching?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-8962
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8962
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 8.6
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-8962_demo.png, failed-tests.patch
>
> Time Spent: 18h 50m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> With near-real-time search we ask {{IndexWriter}} to write all in-memory
> segments to disk and open an {{IndexReader}} to search them, and this is
> typically a quick operation.
> However, when you use many threads for concurrent indexing, {{IndexWriter}}
> will accumulate write many small segments during {{refresh}} and this then
> adds search-time cost as searching must visit all of these tiny segments.
> The merge policy would normally quickly coalesce these small segments if
> given a little time ... so, could we somehow improve {{IndexWriter'}}s
> refresh to optionally kick off merge policy to merge segments below some
> threshold before opening the near-real-time reader? It'd be a bit tricky
> because while we are waiting for merges, indexing may continue, and new
> segments may be flushed, but those new segments shouldn't be included in the
> point-in-time segments returned by refresh ...
> One could almost do this on top of Lucene today, with a custom merge policy,
> and some hackity logic to have the merge policy target small segments just
> written by refresh, but it's tricky to then open a near-real-time reader,
> excluding newly flushed but including newly merged segments since the refresh
> originally finished ...
> I'm not yet sure how best to solve this, so I wanted to open an issue for
> discussion!
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
