zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-761700207
> If it returns 0, there may be more to read, just not yet available. This
is important for asynchronous channels!
Oh I see! I guess since it's reading into a
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-761623319
> The issue with seek to filesize is well-known to me, that was also my
first idea I had yesterday in the evening. But I was ready to go to bed and of
course I had a
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-761525653
> > I will try to find the issue tomorrow...! (not sure if I will have time,
so if you can reproduce on Linux feel free to help out)
>
> Hmmm that's strange. On
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-761298120
> I will try to find the issue tomorrow...! (not sure if I will have time,
so if you can reproduce on Linux feel free to help out)
Hmmm that's strange. On my
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-760697048
hi @mikemccand, I just took a look, and pushed some more commits to resolve
latest merge conflicts and adopt new formatting.
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-753800497
> Hi @dweiss, for the JDK compiler issue, I ended up submitting a bug report
to open jdk (internal review id 9068426) as I'm hoping to be able to refer to
this issue in
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-753560734
Hi @dweiss, for the JDK compiler issue, I ended up submitting a bug report
to open jdk (internal review id 9068426) as I'm hoping to be able to refer to
this issue in
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-753557228
Hi Uwe, I've gone ahead and pushed a commit for the following:
1. Add checksum computation
2. Add a new test to exercise the DirectIODirectory with actual index
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-753556939
Hi Uwe, I've gone ahead and pushed a commit for the following:
1. Add checksum
This is an automated
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-751925231
Hi @uschindler, I will have some time in the next few days. Do you mind me
taking a look at what's left here and potentially pushing some changes? Don't
want to get in
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748804203
> This may also happen on other operating systems. It depends on if the
buffer is already aligned when you call alignSlice(). If it is not aligned
(seems to happen 100%
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748563011
Oh wow thanks for the updates there, and sorry to hear the current changes
are not yet ready! Yes the original implementation hasn't been used for a while
now (as
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748509146
> > Hmm I don't have a windows box to test this. The blockSize is
dynamically computed though. If this works on linux/darwin but fails on
windows, does it signal
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748506650
> Hi, I implemented the approach and also cleaned up the lookup code to not
require unchecked casts. I also made the code safer for exceptions, you only
catched
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748443350
> You can do it statically, look at how the unmapper in Mmapdir works:
> Look up the reflective in static intitalizer and save the result at very
end in static final.
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748441602
> I'll try to help out later today, Zach.
Sounds good. Thanks Dawid!
This is an automated
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-748427066
Wow thanks everyone for the great suggestions and ideas! Really appreciate
them! Didn't quite anticipate we would go so deep into looking at java compiler
when picking
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-747890887
> > Alas, `gradlew precommit` from the command-line on Linux box is still
angry for me:
> > ```
> > > Task :lucene:misc:compileJava
> >
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-745039717
> Alas, `gradlew precommit` from the command-line on Linux box is still
angry for me:
>
> ```
> > Task :lucene:misc:compileJava
>
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-740306114
> Hmm, `gradlew precommit` is angry:
>
> ```
> > Task :lucene:misc:compileJava
>
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-737614580
Just want to have a quick follow up on this PR. Are there any more changes
expected from my end?
This
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-731491257
> > > Second, it is extremely experimental and not clear when it provides
benefits / what risks there are / etc. We need to learn much more about it, in
diverse usage,
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-731491171
> > I am not sure if we should preserve the native PosixUtil. It's used
nowhere and was only added by @mikemccand back at that time to do more testing.
> > Nowadays,
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-729520080
> I stated a bit earlier, removing WindowsDirectory should be a separate PR.
It's not the same thing (it's not about DirectIO), it works around aproblem
with positional
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-729393685
I've been following the comment thread on `WindowsDirectory`, but not sure
if there's a consensus to remove it in this PR? For the time being, I've pushed
a standalone
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-729389857
> > I think we just need to resolve the "replace now or not" question?
>
> I'd like to improve the testcase and use a real index on top of a
combination with
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-729387261
> > Second, it is extremely experimental and not clear when it provides
benefits / what risks there are / etc. We need to learn much more about it, in
diverse usage, to
zacharymorn commented on pull request #2052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2052#issuecomment-723400516
> Thank you @zacharymorn! It's so nice we can move this to pure java now --
this makes it much easier and lower risk for Lucene users to test.
>
> I suspect for
28 matches
Mail list logo
