[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1708?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12722783#action_12722783
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-1708:
------------------------------------
bq. I see lots of cleanups snuck in here
Not all cleanups are bad, i.e. changing to iteration-based loops, rather than
calling list.size() in each loop and list.get(i), is better, and cleaner :). I
admit though that some of the cleanups just helped me understand the code
better.
> Improve the use of isDeleted in the indexing code
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1708
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1708
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1708.patch, LUCENE-1708.patch
>
>
> A spin off from here:
> http://www.nabble.com/Some-thoughts-around-the-use-of-reader.isDeleted-and-hasDeletions-td23931216.html.
> Two changes:
> # Optimize SegmentMerger work when a reader has no deletions.
> # IndexReader.document() will no longer check if the document is deleted.
> Will post a patch shortly
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
