[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1749?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12736732#action_12736732
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1749:
-------------------------------------
bq. figure out why previously mentioned tests are breaking (need help with this
one ... don't know enough about the code these tests excercise
Eh - its yucky. There are parts where the tests are passing the top level
reader (say to a collector) when it should be using the sub readers. I fixed
one :)
But then there is more - looked at a couple more difficult ones that also pass
the top level reader for the test.
And then there is explain - IndexSearcher passes the top level reader to the
weight explain, and valuesourcequery will get a fieldcache based on that
reader. I guess that one is a bug.
And there are prob a few other similar type things...
> FieldCache introspection API
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1749
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1749
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Reporter: Hoss Man
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: fieldcache-introspection.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch,
> LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch
>
>
> FieldCache should expose an Expert level API for runtime introspection of the
> FieldCache to provide info about what is in the FieldCache at any given
> moment. We should also provide utility methods for sanity checking that the
> FieldCache doesn't contain anything "odd"...
> * entries for the same reader/field with different types/parsers
> * entries for the same field/type/parser in a reader and it's subreader(s)
> * etc...
--
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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
