[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-5693:
---------------------------------------
Attachment: LUCENE-5693.patch
Patch, decoupled from LUCENE-5675. Tests pass.
The trickiest one was the new TestFieldCacheVsDocValues: it heavily
relies on being able to read deleted docs from postings, which I think
is invalid.
I also had to fix CheckIndex to not verify term vectors for deleted
docs; I think that's fair.
The core fix is easy: FreqProxFields (passed to the PostingsWriterat
flush) just skips the deleted docs.
Also, this uncovered a bug in ToParentBJQ.explain's handling of
deleted docs.
> don't write deleted documents on flush
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5693
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5693
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Attachments: LUCENE-5693.patch
>
>
> When we flush a new segment, sometimes some documents are "born deleted",
> e.g. if the app did a IW.deleteDocuments that matched some not-yet-flushed
> documents.
> We already compute the liveDocs on flush, but then we continue (wastefully)
> to send those known-deleted documents to all Codec parts.
> I started to implement this on LUCENE-5675 but it was too controversial.
> Also, I expect typically the number of deleted docs is 0, or small, so not
> writing "born deleted" docs won't be much of a win for most apps. Still it
> seems silly to write them, consuming IO/CPU in the process, only to consume
> more IO/CPU later for merging to re-delete them.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
