[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14135132#comment-14135132
 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5952:
--------------------------------------------

bq. I think we still have to restrict major to be in the valid range, otherwise 
the encodedValue may overflow. So major should be between 0 and 255, right?

Ahh good, I'll do that.

bq. Just a suggestion: Can we add a fake index with a version number of "6.1.0" 
to see if you correctly get IndexTooNewException and not an IAE? 

So I built this 6.1.0 index (by hacking up a trunk checkout) and CheckIndex 
(also on trunk) happily checked the index without complaints!  I agree we 
should try to somehow test forwards compatibility ... but I'd rather explore 
that on a separate issue?  I'll open one.

bq. In my opinion, we should not save index version as string at all and 
instead save the "encoded value" as an (v)int.

I agree ... I'll fix Lucene46SegmentInfoWriter/Reader to write as int ... I 
think I'll use separate vInts: I don't like tying this "encoded format" 
(stuffing 4 ints that are actually bytes into 1 int) to the index format.

> Make Version.java lenient again?
> --------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-5952
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 4.10
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 4.10.1, 4.11, 5.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-5952.patch
>
>
> As discussed on the dev list, it's spooky how Version.java tries to fully 
> parse the incoming version string ... and then throw exceptions that lack 
> details about what invalid value it received, which file contained the 
> invalid value, etc.
> It also seems too low level to be checking versions (e.g. is not future proof 
> for when 4.10 is passed a 5.x index by accident), and seems redundant with 
> the codec headers we already have for checking versions?
> Should we just go back to lenient parsing?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to