[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13986859#comment-13986859
 ] 

Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-5636:
------------------------------------

Hmm, actually I think I can fix it w/o breaking index back-compat, by manually 
removing the old .fnm files in SegCommitInfo (I'll also improve how this is 
done in general). Assuming very little apps, if at all, write their own 
FieldInfosFormat, I think that's acceptable? I'll work on a patch later.

> SegmentCommitInfo continues to list unneeded gen'd files
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-5636
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5636
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: core/index
>            Reporter: Shai Erera
>            Assignee: Shai Erera
>            Priority: Critical
>         Attachments: LUCENE-5636.patch
>
>
> I thought I handled it in LUCENE-5246, but turns out I didn't handle it 
> fully. I'll upload a patch which improves the test to expose the bug. I know 
> where it is, but I'm not sure how to fix it without breaking index 
> back-compat. Can we do that on experimental features?
> The problem is that if you update different fields in different gens, the 
> FieldInfos files of older gens remain referenced (still!!). I open a new 
> issue since LUCENE-5246 is already resolved and released, so don't want to 
> mess up our JIRA...
> The severity of the bug is that unneeded files are still referenced in the 
> index. Everything still works correctly, it's just that .fnm files are still 
> there. But as I wrote, I'm still not sure how to solve it without requiring 
> apps that use dv updates to reindex.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to