[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769099#action_12769099
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1997:
---
bq. Thats my impression too - Java 1.6 is
Yes - I've seen a handful of non core devs report back that they
upgraded with no complaints on the difficulty. Its in the mailing list
archives. The only core dev I've seen say its easy is Uwe. He's super
sharp though, so I wasn't banking my comment on him ;)
I didn't say it's easy -- for me
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769116#action_12769116
]
John Wang commented on LUCENE-1997:
---
I think I found the reason for the discrepancy: 32
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769119#action_12769119
]
John Wang commented on LUCENE-1997:
---
wrote a small test and verified that 64bit vm's
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769127#action_12769127
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1997:
---
So it does not have something to do with
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769127#action_12769127
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-1997 at 10/23/09 8:00 AM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: LUCENE-1973-Similarity-BW.patch
LUCENE-1973-Similarity.patch
Here
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Committed similarity changes in revision: 829002
Remove deprecated query components
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12765093#action_12765093
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-1973 at 10/23/09 11:27 AM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: LUCENE-1973-Similarity-BW.patch
LUCENE-1973-Similarity.patch
Here
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: (was: LUCENE-1973-Similarity-BW.patch)
Remove deprecated query components
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: (was: LUCENE-1973-Similarity.patch)
Remove deprecated query components
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: (was: LUCENE-1973-Similarity-BW.patch)
Remove deprecated query components
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: (was: LUCENE-1973-Similarity.patch)
Remove deprecated query components
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1257?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769186#action_12769186
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1257:
---
Committed:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769190#action_12769190
]
Grant Ingersoll commented on LUCENE-2002:
-
I'm getting errors applying this, but
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-1973:
--
Attachment: LUCENE-1973-BoostingTermQuery.patch
remove BoostingTermQuery.
The
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12765093#action_12765093
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-1973 at 10/23/09 12:22 PM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769194#action_12769194
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1973:
---
Committed removal of BoostingTermQuery in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769196#action_12769196
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2002:
bq. I'm getting errors applying
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769203#action_12769203
]
Grant Ingersoll commented on LUCENE-2002:
-
Yes, they are near the $Id tags.
Yup, I'm not against the testing or the thought - and it is clearly more
complicated - I'm not saying its not. But I haven't seen anyone thats
come and said they haven't grokked it yet or that they had a hard time
with it (though they have run into limitations in what they have tried
to do). John
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769213#action_12769213
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2002:
---
They only appear with native patch. All
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769214#action_12769214
]
Grant Ingersoll commented on LUCENE-2002:
-
+1 on this patch.
Add
I still think we should if performance is no
better with the new one.
Where is there any indication performance is not better with the new one?
The benchmarks are clearly against switching back. At best they could argue for
two API's - even then it depends - a loss of 10% on Java 1.5
with the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769218#action_12769218
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2002:
---
I am happy to then use the merge operations
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769221#action_12769221
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1997:
-
bq. but how does this fit together.
Thats what
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769221#action_12769221
]
Mark Miller edited comment on LUCENE-1997 at 10/23/09 1:31 PM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769222#action_12769222
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1997:
-
bq. As most servers are running 64 bit,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769227#action_12769227
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1997:
---
bq. it creates Comparable objects that can
Mark Miller wrote:
bq. removing that if from the Multi PQ patch makes sense
I didn't have a problem with that either - or other code changes - but
jeeze, mention what you are seeing with the switch. I'll tell you what I
saw it - not that much - a bit of improvement, but take a look at the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-2002:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-2002-29.patch
New patch, adding Version to StopAnalyzer as well.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769232#action_12769232
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2002:
bq. I am happy to then use the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769235#action_12769235
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2002:
---
I know this problem of trunk. But the first
Agreed: so far I'm seeing serious performance loss with MultiPQ,
especially as topN gets larger, and for int sorting.
For small queue, String sort, it sometimes wins.
So if I were forced to decide now based on the current results, I
think we should keep the single PQ API.
But: I am right now
I'm going through and updating my Lucene Boot Camp training for 2.9.
In it, I have some code that shows the various ways you can do deletes.
In 2.4, the code worked fine, in 2.9 it now fails. Here's the code:
public void testDeletions() throws Exception {
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1257?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Kay Kay updated LUCENE-1257:
Attachment: LUCENE-1257_contrib_benchmark_2.patch
Port to Java5
-
Key:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-1997:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-1997.patch
New patch attached:
* Made some basic code level
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-1997:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-1997.patch
New patch, fixes silly bug in sortBench.py.
Explore
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769287#action_12769287
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1997:
Env:
JAVA:
java version 1.5.0_19
Mark,
when removing may comment (as I now understand the whole
FieldDocSortedHitQueue), I found the following as a optimization of the
whole hq:
All FieldDoc values are Compareables (also the score or docid, if they
appear as SortField in a MultiSearcher or ParallelMultiSearcher). The code
of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769295#action_12769295
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1997:
32 bit 1.5 JRE:
JAVA:
java
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769299#action_12769299
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2002:
Actually to port to trunk I was
This probably warrants a CHANGES entry?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:07 PM, markrmil...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markrmiller
Date: Fri Oct 23 17:07:22 2009
New Revision: 829128
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=829128view=rev
Log:
LUCENE-2003:
Yeah - coming up.
Yonik Seeley wrote:
This probably warrants a CHANGES entry?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:07 PM, markrmil...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markrmiller
Date: Fri Oct 23 17:07:22 2009
New Revision: 829128
URL:
Nice! I like it. Even if its not much faster (havn't checked either), I
can't see it being much slower and its cleaner code.
I'd be happy to do some quick perf tests when I get a chance, but I'm +1
on it.
Uwe Schindler wrote:
Mark,
when removing may comment (as I now understand the whole
I've noticed recently when merging from 2.9.x - trunk or vice/versa,
for some reason it picks up files that had zero source changes in the
revision I merged, but do show changes to their svn:mergeinfo.
EG for LUCENE-2002, I merged 2.9.x - trunk, and now on my trunk
checkout I see this mods:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769328#action_12769328
]
Jake Mannix commented on LUCENE-1997:
-
Mike, thanks for all the hard work on this -
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769332#action_12769332
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1997:
-
Mike's latest results are more ambiguous - let
It's okay in a sense.
See, svn's merge-tracking support was grafted onto it in a particulary
hideous way and is really hairy on the insides.
So while there's no sane explanation for that behaviour, it is expected.
See -
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769365#action_12769365
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1997:
-
JAVA:
java version 1.5.0_20
Java(TM) 2 Runtime
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769368#action_12769368
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1997:
I agree the new results are now
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless updated LUCENE-2002:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-2002.patch
Patch for trunk; I plan to commit soon...
Add
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769389#action_12769389
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2006:
---
Mark Miller on java-dev:
{quote}
Nice! I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Uwe Schindler updated LUCENE-2006:
--
Attachment: LUCENE-2006.patch
Patch.
Optimization for FieldDocSortedHitQueue
I opened LUCENE-2006.
Is there any MultiSearcher related task/alg in contrib/benchmark?
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
-Original Message-
From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October
No - was considering how one might be added - Mike's python script
control to JIRA output stuff is just so cool, I'd hate to test any other
way ;) The new colors feature makes it even better. Not sure how best to
fit it in though - need a way to specify multiple indices obviously.
Would love to
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769404#action_12769404
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2006:
---
The reason why this code looked like this
OK thanks for the pointer :) It's very strange indeed.
Mike
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Earwin Burrfoot ear...@gmail.com wrote:
It's okay in a sense.
See, svn's merge-tracking support was grafted onto it in a particulary
hideous way and is really hairy on the insides.
So while there's
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769406#action_12769406
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2002:
---
A mega patch, one thing:
The highlighter
Ist very easy to explain:
The mergeinfo is inherited from top level directories downto each file. If
one of the files already contained a mergeinfo in its properties (e.g. the
TestBackwardsCompatibility), because it was merged separately (I
reverse-merged this test as a separate action during my
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769412#action_12769412
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2002:
bq. So the QueryParser ctors
Ahhh, ok, that makes sense.
Mike
2009/10/23 Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de:
Ist very easy to explain:
The mergeinfo is inherited from top level directories downto each file. If
one of the files already contained a mergeinfo in its properties (e.g. the
TestBackwardsCompatibility), because it
Hi Mike:
Thank you! It would be really nice to get the optimizations you have
done.
-John
2009/10/23 Michael McCandless luc...@mikemccandless.com
Agreed: so far I'm seeing serious performance loss with MultiPQ,
especially as topN gets larger, and for int sorting.
For small queue, String
They are included in my last patch on LUCENE-1997. It's somewhat
hacked up though :) We'd have to redo it for real if we go forward
with this...
Mike
2009/10/23 John Wang john.w...@gmail.com:
Hi Mike:
Thank you! It would be really nice to get the optimizations you have
done.
-John
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2003?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769452#action_12769452
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2003:
Mark is this one done?
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael McCandless resolved LUCENE-2002.
Resolution: Fixed
Add oal.util.Version ctor to QueryParser
I think we should allow new features into contrib for 3.0.
I don't even like holding new features from core for 3.0.
In general I don't think it's healthy when trunk is locked down
Trunk should be like a locomotive that's plowing ahead at all times.
Mike
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:48 PM,
I'll just remove TestStressSort...
Mike
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Michael McCandless
luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
Indeed! It's doing nothing now. Just creating Sort objects but not
in fact doing any searching with them. Hmm.
Unfortunately, the test very much relied on the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2003?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mark Miller resolved LUCENE-2003.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Lucene Fields: [New, Patch Available] (was: [New])
Highlighter has
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769456#action_12769456
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1942:
Can you make a simple patch for
OK we are now down to 0 issues!! It's been exciting :)
Assuming nothing crops up over the weekend, I plan to start the
release process on Monday.
Mike
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769466#action_12769466
]
Hasan Diwan commented on LUCENE-1942:
-
Patch files are independent of the platform
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769467#action_12769467
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1942:
-
i'm not able to read this patch file either...
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769468#action_12769468
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1942:
But the attachment here is a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769471#action_12769471
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1942:
-
Its not only a binary file, but it clearly says
I try to get the rest of search deprecations away in 3.0, but then we should
be sure, that there are no more such problems like with the posIncrement in
QueryParser that need additional changes in 2.9.1 API.
Maybe somebody can help me with the rest of LUCENE-1973, the rest is
explain() in Scorer
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769477#action_12769477
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1942:
---
I do not understand the whole problem. We
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote:
I try to get the rest of search deprecations away in 3.0, but then we should
be sure, that there are no more such problems like with the posIncrement in
QueryParser that need additional changes in 2.9.1 API.
That sounds
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote:
I try to get the rest of search deprecations away in 3.0, but then we
should
be sure, that there are no more such problems like with the posIncrement
in
QueryParser that need additional changes in 2.9.1 API.
That
On 10/23/09 3:00 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
I try to get the rest of search deprecations away in 3.0, but then we should
be sure, that there are no more such problems like with the posIncrement in
QueryParser that need additional changes in 2.9.1 API.
Maybe somebody can help me with the rest of
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769483#action_12769483
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1942:
bq. I do not understand the whole
Open is still the problem with compressed fields (see LUCENE-1960), if
we
use option 3 (isCompressed() deprec method, we have to add it to 2.9,
too -
I would not prefer this).
See the issue for details. I do not want to add this method, as it would
break bw compatibility in 2.9 if
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769485#action_12769485
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1942:
-
Well if the title is self explanatory as said,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769489#action_12769489
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
If we want to stay with the current patch,
Well, we should then have added it to 2.9.0 already. Normally we don't
introduce new APIs in bugfix releases.
This could be a candidate for the backwards-compat break section: If you
have compressed fields you need to change your code, otherwise drop-in
will work.
2.9.1 already has such
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769490#action_12769490
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
I'm actually -1 for option 1). The whole
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769494#action_12769494
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
And how about keeping the current
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769497#action_12769497
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1960:
Can't we detect that we're
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769499#action_12769499
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
Right, because FieldsReader#rawDocs() does
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769503#action_12769503
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
Good idea, from where take the version?
Or
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769507#action_12769507
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
Can't we detect that we're dealing
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769510#action_12769510
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
But this is only one-time. As soon as it is
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769509#action_12769509
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-2006:
-
Okay Uwe -
I took a 2 GB zipped Wiki dump and
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769511#action_12769511
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
Or better, we look into the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769515#action_12769515
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2006:
---
I think it is because you only merge the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769517#action_12769517
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
But this is only one-time. As soon
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769520#action_12769520
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
So the idea is to raise the version number
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769521#action_12769521
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-2006:
-
Right - I don't think we have to worry about
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2006?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12769522#action_12769522
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2006:
---
OK, I commit soon!
Optimization for
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
