Thanks Roman! Let's expand it for the sake of completeness. Such issue is not possible in Solr, because caches are associated with the searcher. While you follow this design (see Solr userCache), and don't update what's cached once, there is no chance to shoot the foot. There were few caches inside of Lucene (old FieldCache, CachingWrapperFilter, ExternalFileField, etc), but they are properly mapped onto segment keys, hence it exclude such leakage across different searchers.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Roman Chyla <roman.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1, additionally (as it follows from your observation) the query can get > out of sync with the index, if eg it was saved for later use and ran > against newly opened searcher > > Roman > On 4 Dec 2014 10:51, "Darin Amos" <dari...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I have been doing a lot of research in building some custom queries and I > > have been looking at the Lucene Join library as a reference. I noticed > > something that I believe could actually have a negative side effect. > > > > Specifically I was looking at the JoinUtil.createJoinQuery(…) method and > > within that method you see the following code: > > > > TermsWithScoreCollector termsWithScoreCollector = > > TermsWithScoreCollector.create(fromField, > > multipleValuesPerDocument, scoreMode); > > fromSearcher.search(fromQuery, termsWithScoreCollector); > > > > As you can see, when the JoinQuery is being built, the code is executing > > the query that is wraps with it’s own collector to collect all the > scores. > > If I were to write a query parser using this library (which someone has > > done here), doesn’t this reduce the benefit of the SOLR query cache? The > > wrapped query is being executing when the Join Query is being > constructed, > > not when it is executed. > > > > Thanks > > > > Darin > > > -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev Principal Engineer, Grid Dynamics <http://www.griddynamics.com> <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com>
