First cut of updated handler now in:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1155
Needs review from those that know Lucene better, and double check for errors
in locking or other areas of the code. Thanks.
--j
jayson.minard wrote:
>
> Can we move this to patch files within the JIRA issue please. Will make
> it easier to review and help out a as a patch to current trunk.
>
> --j
>
>
> Jim Murphy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Yonik Seeley-2 wrote:
>>>
>>> ...your code snippit elided and edited below ...
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Don't take this code as correct (or even compiling) but is this the
>> essence? I moved shared access to the writer inside the read lock and
>> kept the other non-commit bits to the write lock. I'd need to rethink
>> the locking in a more fundamental way but is this close to idea?
>>
>>
>>
>> public void commit(CommitUpdateCommand cmd) throws IOException {
>>
>> if (cmd.optimize) {
>> optimizeCommands.incrementAndGet();
>> } else {
>> commitCommands.incrementAndGet();
>> }
>>
>> Future[] waitSearcher = null;
>> if (cmd.waitSearcher) {
>> waitSearcher = new Future[1];
>> }
>>
>> boolean error=true;
>> iwCommit.lock();
>> try {
>> log.info("start "+cmd);
>>
>> if (cmd.optimize) {
>> closeSearcher();
>> openWriter();
>> writer.optimize(cmd.maxOptimizeSegments);
>> }
>> finally {
>> iwCommit.unlock();
>> }
>>
>>
>> iwAccess.lock();
>> try
>> {
>> writer.commit();
>> }
>> finally
>> {
>> iwAccess.unlock();
>> }
>>
>> iwCommit.lock();
>> try
>> {
>> callPostCommitCallbacks();
>> if (cmd.optimize) {
>> callPostOptimizeCallbacks();
>> }
>> // open a new searcher in the sync block to avoid opening it
>> // after a deleteByQuery changed the index, or in between deletes
>> // and adds of another commit being done.
>> core.getSearcher(true,false,waitSearcher);
>>
>> // reset commit tracking
>> tracker.didCommit();
>>
>> log.info("end_commit_flush");
>>
>> error=false;
>> }
>> finally {
>> iwCommit.unlock();
>> addCommands.set(0);
>> deleteByIdCommands.set(0);
>> deleteByQueryCommands.set(0);
>> numErrors.set(error ? 1 : 0);
>> }
>>
>> // if we are supposed to wait for the searcher to be registered, then
>> we should do it
>> // outside of the synchronized block so that other update operations
>> can proceed.
>> if (waitSearcher!=null && waitSearcher[0] != null) {
>> try {
>> waitSearcher[0].get();
>> } catch (InterruptedException e) {
>> SolrException.log(log,e);
>> } catch (ExecutionException e) {
>> SolrException.log(log,e);
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Autocommit-blocking-adds---AutoCommit-Speedup--tp23435224p23457422.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
