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 18:05:47 GMT


Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1708:

bq. There is a paragraph in CHANGES under "Changes to Runtime Behavior" that explains this.

Right, I saw that - I just wondered about the discussion to do it.

bq. I think it was on the email thread and not on this issue, that people preferred the runtime
change vs. the deprecation and a new method name for document(), under the assumption that
it's very unlikely that someone relies on IndexReader.document() checking for isDeleted (i.e.,
it passes a document which may or may not be deleted).

Thanks - thats the discussion I wasn't able to spot.

> 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