lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark Miller (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1708) Improve the use of isDeleted in the indexing code
Date Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:37:47 GMT


Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1708:

I cant find the back compat discussion on this. Did I miss?

I do see where mike mentions the isDeleted change should happen with deprecation, but this
patch appears to just make the change. Our current back compat policy doesn't allow that.
It doesn't even really allow the really special exceptions that we have had to make (and I
think it should spell that out, as well as our 'experiemental trick'). We have not officially
allowed a relaxed back compat policy right?

I'm not trying to police back compat, but I think we need to do our best to live up to it
until its officially changed. Having had to make a couple exceptions doesn't mean we can just
toss it for this release.

Sorry if I missed the relevant discussion on this - didn't see anything in the attached email

> Improve the use of isDeleted in the indexing code
> -------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-1708
>                 URL:
>             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:
> 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:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message