[hibernate-issues] [Hibernate-JIRA] Commented: (HSEARCH-1075) FSSlaveDirectoryProvider JMS configuration documentation is incomplete

[Sanne Grinovero (JIRA)]

    [ https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/HSEARCH-1075?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=46071#comment-46071 ] 

Sanne Grinovero commented on HSEARCH-1075:
------------------------------------------

Hi, thanks you're right that statement is quite outdated.

I'm not sure however on the wording "least amount of time": a copy might just have happened.

Proposal:
{quote}It is recommended that the refresh period be higher than the expected copy time; if a copy operation is still being performed when the next refresh triggers, the second refresh is skipped: it's safe to set this value low even when the copy time is not known.{quote}

Or since the _refresh_ parameter is documented in the configuration table, I'd be tempted to just remove the tip (with no replacement).


> FSSlaveDirectoryProvider JMS configuration documentation is incomplete
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HSEARCH-1075
>                 URL: https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/HSEARCH-1075
>             Project: Hibernate Search
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: documentation
>    Affects Versions: 4.0.0.Final
>         Environment: all
>            Reporter: Eli Colner
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: documentation
>   Original Estimate: 1h
>  Remaining Estimate: 1h
>
> The documentation for 'hibernate.search.default.refresh' property states that "The refresh period should be higher that the expected copy time." which is misleading imo.  It should read "The refresh period represents the least amount of time that slaves will be out of sync with the master.  It is recommended that the refresh period be higher than the expected copy time, however if the value becomes insufficient then the default implementation of FSSlaveDirectoryProvider will prevent multiple copies from occurring simultaneously using a mutex lock.  It's safe to set this value low anticipating that as your index grows the lock will be used appropriately."
> Based on the code, I believe the default value to be very high... but that's a separate issue.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira