You'll probably want to call Solr commit, however you'll want to call IW.flush underneath (via a new Solr commit flag?).
Yes, the Solr caches would be somewhat useless if you're calling Solr commit/flush rapidly. See SOLR-1308 on improving caches for NRT. On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 7:22 PM, KaktuChakarabati<jimmoe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So basically the idea is to replace the underlying IndexReader currently > associated with a searcher/solrCore following an update without calling > commit explicitly? This will also have the effect of bringing in inserts > btw? or is it just usable for deletes? > In terms of cache invalidation etc there are probably some issues i.e in > respect to documents which are cached > as part of some result set or so and need to expunged due to a deletion? > > > Jason Rutherglen-2 wrote: >> >> I can give an overview, IW.getReader replaces IR.reopen. So >> you'd replace in SolrCore.getSearcher. However as per another >> discussion IW isn't public yet, so all you'd need to do is >> expose it from UpdateHandler. Then it should work as you want, >> though there would need to be a new method to create a new >> searcher from IW.getReader without calling IW.commit. >> >> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:37 PM, KaktuChakarabati<jimmoe...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Jason, >>> sounds like a very promising change to me - so much that I would gladly >>> work >>> toward creating a patch myself. >>> Are there any specific points in the code u could point me to if I wanna >>> look at how to start off implementing it? >>> Lucene/Solr Classes involved etc? i'll start looking myself anyhow but >>> any >>> tips would be helpful.. :) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Chak >>> >>> >>> Jason Rutherglen-2 wrote: >>>> >>>> This will be implemented as you're stating when >>>> IndexWriter.getReader is incorporated. This will carry over >>>> deletes in RAM until IW.commit is called (i.e. Solr commit). >>>> It's a fairly simple change though perhaps too late for 1.4 >>>> release? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:10 PM, KaktuChakarabati<jimmoe...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey, >>>>> I was wondering - is there a mechanism in lucene and/or solr to mark a >>>>> document in the index >>>>> as deleted and then have this change reflect in query serving without >>>>> performing the whole >>>>> commit/warmup cycle? this seems to me largely appealing as it allows a >>>>> kind >>>>> of solution >>>>> where deletes are simply processed by marking them in a bitmap or some >>>>> such >>>>> structure >>>>> and then intersecting search results with those on a per-shard basis. >>>>> >>>>> Anything in that direction? Otherwise, is there any critical issue >>>>> preventing such an implementation? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Chak >>>>> -- >>>>> View this message in context: >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Incremental-Deletes-to-Index-tp25143093p25143093.html >>>>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://www.nabble.com/Incremental-Deletes-to-Index-tp25143093p25144124.html >>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Incremental-Deletes-to-Index-tp25143093p25145535.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
