Could you make a small standalone test case showing what used to work
and what no longer works?

I don't think that issue was supposed to alter how IndexWriter
interacts with the analysis chain.

Mike McCandless

http://blog.mikemccandless.com

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Ľuboš Koščo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Resp. how to make the double inherited analyzer (on the bottom of
> inheritance) be used again, instead of hidden by its father direct
> descendant of Analyzer?
> (father:
> https://github.com/OpenGrok/OpenGrok/blob/master/src/org/opensolaris/opengrok/analysis/FileAnalyzer.java
> child:
> https://github.com/OpenGrok/OpenGrok/blob/master/src/org/opensolaris/opengrok/analysis/java/JavaAnalyzer.java
> - looking at above it's even deeper inheritance, so Analyzer -> FileAnalyzer
> -> ... ->JavaAnalyzer as the last child)
>
> (funny enough the code on our side that creates docs didn't really change
> since 4.7.1 , but new lucene now picks FileAnalyzer over any other analyzer
> for createComponents anyways)
>
> tia
> L
>
> On 10 February 2017 at 13:41, Ľuboš Koščo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys, Mike
>>
>> is there any chance I can somehow get the indexing chain to behave similar
>> as before LUCENE-5611 in 6.4.1 ?
>>
>> We used to have analyzers that inherited multiple times from Analyzer
>> (e.g. second child and relaxed and overriden createComponents) and lucene
>> used to run them for appropriate docs properly
>> but after LUCENE-5611 I can see the chain changed and only the first child
>> is always taken into account, even though the document is handled by proper
>> analyzer ...
>> (basically between 4.7.1 and 6.4.1 something changed that made lucene just
>> ignore second child of analyzer and won't use it and always use first one
>> (and its father, the direct override of createComponents))
>> Some code pointers on what used to work and now isn't :
>> https://github.com/OpenGrok/OpenGrok/issues/1376
>> (and I tried to dig the changelogs and the only thing I found is really
>> around 5611, hence this silly Q)
>>
>> any clues how to get old behaviour back?
>>
>> thnx
>> L
>>
>

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

Reply via email to