Michael McCandless created LUCENE-4485:
------------------------------------------
Summary: CheckIndex's term stats should not include deleted docs
Key: LUCENE-4485
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4485
Project: Lucene - Core
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Michael McCandless
Assignee: Michael McCandless
I was looking at the CheckIndex output on and index that has deletions, eg:
{noformat}
4 of 30: name=_90 docCount=588408
codec=Lucene41
compound=false
numFiles=14
size (MB)=265.318
diagnostics = {os=Linux, os.version=3.2.0-23-generic, mergeFactor=10,
source=merge, lucene.version=5.0-SNAPSHOT, os.arch=amd64,
mergeMaxNumSegments=-1, java.version=1.7.0_07, java.vendor=Oracle Corporation}
has deletions [delGen=1]
test: open reader.........OK [39351 deleted docs]
test: fields..............OK [8 fields]
test: field norms.........OK [2 fields]
test: terms, freq, prox...OK [4910342 terms; 61319238 terms/docs pairs;
65597188 tokens]
test (ignoring deletes): terms, freq, prox...OK [4910342 terms; 61319238
terms/docs pairs; 70293065 tokens]
test: stored fields.......OK [1647171 total field count; avg 3 fields per
doc]
test: term vectors........OK [0 total vector count; avg 0 term/freq vector
fields per doc]
test: docvalues...........OK [0 total doc count; 1 docvalues fields]
{noformat}
If you compare the {{test: terms, freq, prox}} (includes deletions) and the
next line (doesn't include deletions), it's confusing because only the 3rd
number (tokens) reflects deletions. I think the first two numbers should also
reflect deletions? This way an app could get a sense of how much "deadweight"
is in the index due to un-reclaimed deletions...
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
