Even if the options can be basically summarised in two groups: make it configurable VS not making it configurable and leave it be, when I collected the options from people I ended up with these four and I didn't want to collapse any of them (potentially making the proposer feel diminished).
-------------------------- *Alessandro Benedetti* Director @ Sease Ltd. *Apache Lucene/Solr Committer* *Apache Solr PMC Member* e-mail: a.benede...@sease.io *Sease* - Information Retrieval Applied Consulting | Training | Open Source Website: Sease.io <http://sease.io/> LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/company/sease-ltd> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/seaseltd> | Youtube <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDx86ZKLYNpI3gzMercM7BQ> | Github <https://github.com/seaseltd> On Tue, 16 May 2023 at 15:54, Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, I had wondered if this is a proper vote thread or not, normally > those are yes/no on a single option. > > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:47 AM Alessandro Benedetti < > a.benede...@sease.io> wrote: > >> Hi Marcus, >> I am afraid at this stage Robert's opinion counts just as any other >> opinion, a single vote for option 1. >> We are collecting a community's feedback here, we are not changing any >> code nor voting for a yes/no. >> Once the voting is finished, we'll operate an action depending on the >> community's choice. >> If the action involves making a change and someone(Robert or whoever) >> feels to veto it, he/she will need to motivate the veto with technical >> merit. >> >> In response to Uwe point: >> >>> >>>> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 9:57 AM Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I agree with Dawid, >>>>> >>>>> I am +1 for those two options in combination: >>>>> >>>>> - option 3 (make limit an HNSW specific thing). New formats may >>>>> use other limits (lower or higher). >>>>> - option 4 (make a system property with HNSW prefix). Adding the >>>>> system property must be done in same way like new properties for MMAP >>>>> directory (including access controller) so it can be denied by system >>>>> admin >>>>> to be set in code (see >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/f53eb28af053d7612f7e4d1b2de05d33dc410645/lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/store/MMapDirectory.java#L327-L346 >>>>> for example). Care has to be taken that the static initializers won't >>>>> fail >>>>> is system properties cannot be read/set (system adminitrator enforces >>>>> default -> see mmap code). It also has to be made sure that an index >>>>> written with raised limit can still be read without the limit, so the >>>>> limit >>>>> should not be glued into the file format. Otherwise I disagree with >>>>> option >>>>> 4. >>>>> >>>>> In short: I am fine with making it configurable only for HNSW if the >>>>> limit is not glued into index format. The default should only be there to >>>>> by default prevent people from doing wrong things, but changing default >>>>> should not break reading/modifiying those indexes. >>>>> >>>>> Uwe >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Uwe, that's very useful! >> Just to fully understand it, right now the limit is not written in any >> file format, so you just want this behavior to be maintained right? >> >> > > -- > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) > http://www.the111shift.com (play) >
