Xapian discuss - Oct 2004 - TCL Binding working, but db_lock doesn't get removed?

Ok,
	I've gotten my test.tcl test script to write documents to a xapian 
database, thanks for all the help I've received so far!

Only after the script ends, next time I try to run it, it complains 
about the lock present (the db_lock file is in the directory).

I have to manually delete the db_lock to be able to run the script again 
it seems.

Is there a particular way I should be destroying the WritableDatabase 
object?


By the way:
I'm using...

db replace_document 1 doc

Where db is a WritableDatabase object and
where doc is a Document object

...as a way of setting the docid (I already have a system of unique 
idnumbers starting from 1, I assume a docid can handle any positive 
signed int32?), am I doing this correctly?

Thanks,
Eric

On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 02:03:31PM -0700, Eric Parusel
wrote:
> Only after the script ends, next time I try to run it, it complains 
> about the lock present (the db_lock file is in the directory).
> 
> I have to manually delete the db_lock to be able to run the script again 
> it seems.
Sounds like the destructor for Xapian::WritableDatabase isn't being run.
> Is there a particular way I should be destroying the WritableDatabase 
> object?
For Tcl, I really don't know - sorry!  Perhaps Michael will be able to
suggest something.

It's not just the lock file - unless you explicitly flush before the
script exits, you're rely on the destructor to flush the last batch
of changes.
> db replace_document 1 doc
> 
> Where db is a WritableDatabase object and
> where doc is a Document object
> 
> ...as a way of setting the docid (I already have a system of unique 
> idnumbers starting from 1, I assume a docid can handle any positive 
> signed int32?), am I doing this correctly?
Any positive unsigned 32 bit integer is fine (0 isn't).

The compression schemes used in the tables assume the docids aren't
sparse.  Something like an auto-incrementing uid field from a SQL
database should work well.  Something like using document hashes or
machine IP addresses as the docids probably wouldn't (although there's
also overhead for storing and using a UID term...)

Cheers,
    Olly