mcimadamore commented on PR #12033:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12033#issuecomment-1369859675

   IMHO it would still be useful to have some kind of flag to disable this. 
Because of this patch it is effectively no longer possible to run without 
memory segment in JDK 19 (or later, for future releases). This means that it 
will be quite tricky to diagnose performance differences caused by the byte 
buffer <-> memory segment change vs. JDK N <-> JDK N + 1. I also thought that 
the whole point of only enabling the memory segment index with 
`--enable-preview` was to give a choice to downstream clients whether to enable 
or not, and to test this in the real world (so as to provide feedback). Forcing 
downstream clients to use (indirectly) a preview API is a pragmatic solution, 
for sure, but also one that loses some of the benefits of the previous approach.
   
   IMHO, if there was discomfort in using --enable-preview before because of 
enabling of unwanted features (btw, this concern is not baseless (**)), this 
patch seems to just kick the can down the road: now the discomfort will be 
directed at whether using JDK 19 as a whole or not.
   
   (**) - Java 19 has other preview features as well, namely Loom. In Java 19 
there were some startup regression when enabling Loom. To mitigate these 
regression, Loom support is only enabled if the `--enable-preview` flag is 
detected. (AFAIK, this is no longer the case in 20, as the underlying issues 
have been resolved). So, enabling preview features in JDK 19 *can* result in 
some performance differences, even if _none_ of the Java 19 experimental 
features is used. 


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


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

Reply via email to