[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3298?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13552323#comment-13552323
]
Dawid Weiss commented on LUCENE-3298:
-------------------------------------
{code}
+ void finish(long startNode) throws IOException {
+ if (this.startNode != -1) {
+ throw new IllegalStateException("already finished");
+ }
if (startNode == FINAL_END_NODE && emptyOutput != null) {
startNode = 0;
}
- if (this.startNode != -1) {
- throw new IllegalStateException("already finished");
- }
{code}
Doesn't this change the logic of how it works? I also wonder about the perf.
penalty this patch brings (on 64 systems mostly, but 32-bit JVMs will be most
affected).
> FST has hard limit max size of 2.1 GB
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3298
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3298
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/FSTs
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-3298.patch, LUCENE-3298.patch, LUCENE-3298.patch,
> LUCENE-3298.patch
>
>
> The FST uses a single contiguous byte[] under the hood, which in java is
> indexed by int so we cannot grow this over Integer.MAX_VALUE. It also
> internally encodes references to this array as vInt.
> We could switch this to a paged byte[] and make the far larger.
> But I think this is low priority... I'm not going to work on it any time soon.
--
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: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
