Was a typo, meant to say luceneupgrader. And by itself, it won't do any kind of work to convert fields between different types. For that, you have to do what I described.
TX On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 07:14, Pablo Vázquez Blázquez <pabl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Luckily we were already using lucenemigrator > > > What do you mean with "lucenemigrator"? Is it a public tool? > > I am trying to create a tool to read docs from a lucene5 index and generate > lucene9 documents from them (with docValues). That might work, right? I am > shading both lucene5 and lucene9 to avoid package conflicts. > > Thanks! > > El mar, 1 nov 2022 a las 0:35, Trejkaz (<trej...@trypticon.org>) escribió: > > > Well... > > > > There's a way, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it. > > > > You can write custom migration code against some version of Lucene > > which supports doc values, to create doc values fields. It's going to > > involve writing a FilterCodecReader which wraps your real index and > > then pretends to also have doc values, which you'll build in a custom > > class which works similarly to UninvertingReader. Then you pass those > > CodecReaders to IndexWriter.addIndexes to create a new index which > > really has those doc values. > > > > We did that ourselves when we had the same issue. The only painful > > thing about it is having to keep around older versions of lucene to do > > that migration. Forever. Luckily we were already using lucenemigrator, > > which has the older versions baked into it with package prefixes. So > > that library will get fatter and fatter over time but at least our own > > code only gets fatter at the rate migrations are added. > > > > The same approach works for any other kind of ad-hoc migration you > > might want to perform. e.g., you might want to create points. Or > > remove an index for a field. Or add an index for a field. > > > > TX > > > > > > On Tue, 1 Nov 2022 at 02:57, Pablo Vázquez Blázquez <pabl...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Thank you all for your responses. > > > > > > So, when updating to a newer (major) Lucene version that modifies its > > > codecs, there is no way to ensure everything keeps working properly, > > unless > > > re-indexing, right? > > > > > > Apart from not having some original sources that were indexed (which I > > will > > > try to solve by using the *IndexUpgrader *tool), I have another problem: > > I > > > was using the org.apache.lucene.uninverting.UninvertingReader to perform > > > queries against the index, mainly using the grouping api. But currently, > > it > > > was removed (since Lucene 7.0). So, again, do I have any other > > alternative, > > > apart from re-indexing to use docValues? > > > > > > To give you more context, I am a developer of a tool that multiple > > > customers can use to index their data (currently, with Lucene 5.5.5). We > > > are planning to upgrade to Lucene 9 (because of some vulnerabilities > > > affecting Lucene 5.5.5) and I think asking them to reindex will not go > > down > > > well :( > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > El sáb, 29 oct 2022 a las 23:31, Matt Davis (<kryptonics...@gmail.com>) > > > escribió: > > > > > > > Inside of Zulia search engine, the object being indexed is always a > > > > JSON/BSON object and we store the BSON as a stored byte field in the > > > > index. This allows easy internal reindexing when the searchable fields > > > > change but also allows us to update to the latest lucene version. > > > > Combined with using lucene-backward-codecs an older index than the > > current > > > > major version can be opened and reindexed. If you have stored all the > > > > fields (or a json/bson) in the index, it would be easy to reindex in > > the > > > > new format. If you have not, maybe opening with lucene-backward-codecs > > > > will be enough for your use case. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 2:30 PM Baris Kazar <baris.ka...@oracle.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > It is always great practice to retain non-indexed > > > > > data since when Lucene changes version, > > > > > even minor version, I always reindex. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2022 2:17 PM > > > > > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org <java-user@lucene.apache.org> > > > > > Subject: Re: Best strategy migrate indexes > > > > > > > > > > Hi Pablo, > > > > > > > > > > The deafening silence is probably nobody wanting to give you the bad > > > > news. > > > > > You are on a mission that may not be feasible, and even if you can > > get it > > > > > to "work", the end result won't likely be equivalent to indexing the > > > > > original data with Lucene 9.x. The indexing process is fundamentally > > > > lossy > > > > > and information originally used to produce non-stored fields will > > have > > > > been > > > > > thrown out. A simple example is things like stopwords or anything > > > > analyzed > > > > > with subclasses of FilteringTokenFilter. If the stop word list > > changed, > > > > or > > > > > the details of one of these filters changed (bugfix?), you will end > > up > > > > with > > > > > a different result than indexing with 9.x. This is just one > > > > > example, another would be stemming where the index likely only > > contains > > > > the > > > > > stem, not the whole word. Other folks who are more interested in the > > > > > details of our codecs than I am can probably provide further > > examples on > > > > a > > > > > more fundamental level. Lucene is not a database, and the source > > > > documents > > > > > should always be retained in a form that can be reindexed. If you > > have > > > > > inherited a system where source material has not been retained, you > > have > > > > a > > > > > difficult project and may have some potentially painful expectation > > > > setting > > > > > to perform. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Gus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 8:01 AM Pablo Vázquez Blázquez < > > > > pabl...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I have some indices indexed with lucene 5.5.0. I have updated my > > > > > > dependencies and code to Lucene 7 (but my final goal is to use > > Lucene > > > > 9) > > > > > > and when trying to work with them I am having the exception: > > > > > > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexFormatTooOldException: Format version > > is > > > > not > > > > > > supported (resource > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BufferedChecksumIndexInput(MMapIndexInput(path=".......\tests\segments_b"))): > > > > > > this index is too old (version: 5.5.0). This version of Lucene only > > > > > > supports indexes created with release 6.0 and later. > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to migrate from Lucene 5.x to Lucene 9.x. Which is the best > > > > > > strategy? Is there any tool to migrate the indices? Is it > > mandatory to > > > > > > reindex? In this case, how can I deal with this when I do not have > > the > > > > > > sources of documents that generated my current indices (I mean, I > > just > > > > > have > > > > > > the indices themselves)? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Pablo Vázquez > > > > > > (pabl...@gmail.com) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.needhamsoftware.com__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PVR-c0gAs5FpIrnotHWeo3sEWScxV8oFJrVpGdItGZictcDbRvnp5aZSqCRhglMCYqQsewQOuio4iIYARA$ > > > > > (work) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.the111shift.com__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PVR-c0gAs5FpIrnotHWeo3sEWScxV8oFJrVpGdItGZictcDbRvnp5aZSqCRhglMCYqQsewQOuirxfFWpEQ$ > > > > > (play) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Pablo Vázquez > > > (pabl...@gmail.com) > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > -- > Pablo Vázquez > (pabl...@gmail.com) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
