lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 7x, and 7.0 branches
Date Mon, 03 Jul 2017 07:35:55 GMT
Thanks Anshum, I'll have a look today.

Le ven. 30 juin 2017 à 20:23, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> a écrit :

> Hi Uwe/Adrien,
>
> I reverted a bunch of changes to only get rid of the 5x format codec names
> and it brings me to these errors:
>
>  [javac]
> /Users/anshum/workspace/anshumg/lucene-solr/lucene/backward-codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene60/Lucene60Codec.java:35:
> error: cannot find symbol
>     [javac] import
> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene50.Lucene50SegmentInfoFormat;
>     [javac]                                         ^
>     [javac]   symbol:   class Lucene50SegmentInfoFormat
>     [javac]   location: package org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene50
>     [javac]
> /Users/anshum/workspace/anshumg/lucene-solr/lucene/backward-codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene60/Lucene60Codec.java:39:
> error: package org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53 does not exist
>     [javac] import org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.Lucene53NormsFormat;
>     [javac]                                         ^
>     [javac]
> /Users/anshum/workspace/anshumg/lucene-solr/lucene/backward-codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene62/Lucene62Codec.java:38:
> error: package org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53 does not exist
>     [javac] import org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.Lucene53NormsFormat;
>     [javac]                                         ^
>     [javac]
> /Users/anshum/workspace/anshumg/lucene-solr/lucene/backward-codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene60/Lucene60Codec.java:59:
> error: cannot find symbol
>     [javac]   private final SegmentInfoFormat segmentInfosFormat = new
> Lucene50SegmentInfoFormat();
>     [javac]                                                            ^
>     [javac]   symbol:   class Lucene50SegmentInfoFormat
>     [javac]   location: class Lucene60Codec
>     [javac]
> /Users/anshum/workspace/anshumg/lucene-solr/lucene/backward-codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene60/Lucene60Codec.java:171:
> error: cannot find symbol
>     [javac]   private final NormsFormat normsFormat = new
> Lucene53NormsFormat();
>     [javac]                                               ^
>     [javac]   symbol:   class Lucene53NormsFormat
>     [javac]   location: class Lucene60Codec
>     [javac]
> /Users/anshum/workspace/anshumg/lucene-solr/lucene/backward-codecs/src/java/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene62/Lucene62Codec.java:170:
> error: cannot find symbol
>     [javac]   private final NormsFormat normsFormat = new
> Lucene53NormsFormat();
>     [javac]                                               ^
>     [javac]   symbol:   class Lucene53NormsFormat
>     [javac]   location: class Lucene62Codec
>     [javac] 6 errors
>
> As you mentioned, the old codecs are still used, but I thought we wouldn’t
> need the 5x named formats. Should we just keep all of this?
>
> I also recreated my fork and applied the patch from the older fork,
> instead of running the upgrade script, only so that I didn’t have to run
> the upgrade script. The upgrade script doesn’t work on anything but the
> master branch for a major version bump.
>
> All my changes are now here:
> https://github.com/anshumg/lucene-solr/tree/upgrade-master-to-8
>
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Jun 29, 2017, at 4:18 PM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:
>
> The problem is that old 7.x indexes still use some codecs named by version
> 6. They were never updated!
>
> So backwards codec must keep all stuff in metainf and as classes that the
> 7.0 original index format requires. Maybe create a dummy 7.0 index in
> branch-7x to have a list of codecs to test.
>
> Uwe
>
> Am 30. Juni 2017 00:43:06 MESZ schrieb Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com>:
>>
>> I’ve pushed more changes there, and we have a new set of errors. This is
>> one of them:
>>
>>    [junit4]   2> NOTE: reproduce with: ant test
>> -Dtestcase=TestBackwardsCompatibility
>> -Dtests.method=testUnsupportedOldIndexes -Dtests.seed=8FDA7D3598A2FB46
>> -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.locale=ar-LB
>> -Dtests.timezone=America/Indiana/Marengo -Dtests.asserts=true
>> -Dtests.file.encoding=UTF-8
>>    [junit4] ERROR   3.07s |
>> TestBackwardsCompatibility.testUnsupportedOldIndexes <<<
>>    [junit4]    > Throwable #1: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Could
>> not load codec 'Lucene60'.  Did you forget to add
>> lucene-backward-codecs.jar?
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([8FDA7D3598A2FB46:74214F1628395C1A]:0)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCodec(SegmentInfos.java:433)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCommit(SegmentInfos.java:360)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCommit(SegmentInfos.java:295)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.StandardDirectoryReader$1.doBody(StandardDirectoryReader.java:59)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.StandardDirectoryReader$1.doBody(StandardDirectoryReader.java:56)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$FindSegmentsFile.run(SegmentInfos.java:694)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.StandardDirectoryReader.open(StandardDirectoryReader.java:79)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.DirectoryReader.open(DirectoryReader.java:63)
>>    [junit4]    > at
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestBackwardsCompatibility.testUnsupportedOldIndexes(TestBackwardsCompatibility.java:613)
>>    [junit4]    > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
>>    [junit4]    > Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: An SPI
>> class of type org.apache.lucene.codecs.Codec with name 'Lucene60' does not
>> exist.  You need to add the corresponding JAR file supporting this SPI to
>> your classpath.  The current classpath supports the following names:
>> [Asserting, CheapBastard, FastCompressingStoredFields,
>> FastDecompressionCompressingStoredFields,
>> HighCompressionCompressingStoredFields, DummyCompressingStoredFields,
>> SimpleText, Lucene70]
>>
>>
>> Do you intend to Ignore this for now? Also, in the last commit, I’ve
>> Ignored a bunch of tests that use the old indexes.
>>
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did remove the declaration in META-INT/services, atleast everything
>> that had a version in it’s name i.e. 5x, or 6x.
>>
>> I’ve also renamed the indexes for 6x, but here are a few that I wasn’t
>> sure about what to do with these:
>> sorted.6.3.0.zip
>> sorted.6.2.1.zip
>> sorted.6.2.0.zip
>> moreterms.6.0.0.zip
>> maxposindex.zip
>> manypointsindex.zip
>> empty.6.0.0.zip
>> dvupdates.6.0.0.zip
>>
>> Considering you suggested disabling the tests, should we be removing
>> these indexes and regenerating these post release when re re-enable tests
>> or should we keep them here and just disable the tests?
>>
>> I’ve reverted the changes in SegmentInfos.java, and also changed
>> testIllegalCreatedVersion as per your suggestion.
>>
>> I’m running the tests now, and will commit to my fork right after.
>>
>> Thanks for helping out with this.
>>
>> -Anshum
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 2:33 PM, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Removing most backward codecs sounds good to me since the only codec that
>> 8.0 needs to be able to read so far is the 7.0 codec which is in core. It
>> looks like you removed the code, but you also need to remove their
>> declaration in META-INF/services or the SPI loaded will try to load them
>> and fail since it cannot find the class.
>>
>> Backcompat indexes will be added as we perform 7.x releases. However
>> you'd need to rename the 6.x indices from index.6.x.x to unsupported.6.x.x.
>>
>> We have some specific tests like "moreterms" and "dvupdates". I think we
>> need to disable them for now and make sure to reenable them once 7.0 is
>> released.
>>
>> I think the changes you did in SegmentInfos.java
>> <https://github.com/anshumg/lucene-solr/commit/c7f5b9f9fa94fe1a6e6abc7ffc74fc3df16293a4#diff-e3ccf9ee90355b10f2dd22ce2da6c73c>
are
>> not necessary. It looks like the version numbers are related to the current
>> major, but it is actually due to the fact that 7.0 is the first version to
>> record the version that was used at creation time. I think you can revert
>> changes in this file entirely. In the testIllegalCreatedVersion test,
>> I'd just replace 8 with 9 or Version.CURRENT.major + 1.
>>
>> We'd need to remove the compatibility layer in similarities but it can be
>> done as a follow-up.
>>
>> Thanks for taking care of this!
>>
>> Le jeu. 29 juin 2017 à 23:12, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> Adrien, I’ve pushed some more changes and seems like I’d have to
>>> regenerate some test indexes but I’m not sure how to do that. Do you mind
>>> taking a look at this in it’s current form, and also my commits? It is all
>>> @ my fork here: https://github.com/anshumg/lucene-solr
>>>
>>> P.S: I thought it’d make more sense to do this on a feature-branch but
>>> the upgrade script wasn’t happy about that.
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Going with your suggestions, seems like we’d be wiping out all of the
>>> backward-codecs folder/package, is that correct ? Also, do we need to put
>>> in anything to ensure back-combat between 6x, and 7x?
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Adrien, I’d want to try and do this myself as long as you can
>>> validate the correctness :).
>>>
>>> I’ll be working on this in a few hours and should have an update later
>>> today and hopefully we’d wrap it up soon.
>>>
>>> -Anshum
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 10:39 AM, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> If you don't want to do it, I can do it tomorrow but if you'd like to
>>> give it a try I'd be happy to help if you need any guidance.
>>>
>>> Le mer. 28 juin 2017 à 19:38, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> a écrit
:
>>>
>>>> Hi Anshum,
>>>>
>>>> This looks like a good start to me. You would also need to remove the
>>>> 6.x version constants so that TestBackwardCompatibility does not think they
>>>> are worth testing, as well as all codecs, postings formats and doc values
>>>> formats that are defined in the lucene/backward-codecs module since they
>>>> are only about 6.x codecs.
>>>>
>>>> Le mer. 28 juin 2017 à 09:57, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for confirming that Alan, I had similar thoughts but wasn’t
>>>>> sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don’t want to change anything that I’m not confident about so I’m
>>>>> just going to create remove those and commit it to my fork. If someone
>>>>> who’s confident agrees with what I’m doing, I’ll go ahead and make
those
>>>>> changes to the upstream :).
>>>>>
>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 12:54 AM, Alan Woodward <alan@flax.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We don’t need to support lucene5x codecs in 7, so you should be able
>>>>> to just remove those tests (and the the relevant packages from
>>>>> backwards-codecs too), I think?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28 Jun 2017, at 08:38, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I tried to move forward to see this work before automatically
>>>>> computing the versions but I have about 30 odd failing test. I’ve made
>>>>> those changes and pushed to my local GitHub account in case you have
the
>>>>> time to look: https://github.com/anshumg/lucene-solr
>>>>>
>>>>> Here’s the build summary if that helps:
>>>>>
>>>>>    [junit4] Tests with failures [seed: 31C3B60E557C7E14] (first 10 out
>>>>> of 31):
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testOutliers2
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testShortRange
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testFewValues
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testFullLongRange
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testRamBytesUsed
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testFewLargeValues
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testByteRange
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene53.TestLucene53NormsFormat.testLongRange
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene50.TestLucene50SegmentInfoFormat.testRandomExceptions
>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.codecs.lucene62.TestLucene62SegmentInfoFormat.testRandomExceptions
>>>>>    [junit4]
>>>>>    [junit4]
>>>>>    [junit4] JVM J0:     0.56 ..     9.47 =     8.91s
>>>>>    [junit4] JVM J1:     0.56 ..     4.13 =     3.57s
>>>>>    [junit4] JVM J2:     0.56 ..    47.28 =    46.73s
>>>>>    [junit4] JVM J3:     0.56 ..     3.89 =     3.33s
>>>>>    [junit4] Execution time total: 47 seconds
>>>>>    [junit4] Tests summary: 8 suites, 215 tests, 30 errors, 1 failure,
>>>>> 24 ignored (24 assumptions)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 27, 2017, at 4:15 AM, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The test***BackwardCompatibility cases can be removed since they make
>>>>> sure that Lucene 7 can read Lucene 6 norms, while Lucene 8 doesn't have
to
>>>>> be able to read Lucene 6 norms.
>>>>>
>>>>> TestSegmentInfos needs to be adapted to the new versions, we need to
>>>>> replace 5 with 6 and 8 with 9. Maybe we should compute those numbers
>>>>> automatically based on Version.LATEST.major so that it does not require
>>>>> manual changes when moving to a new major version. That would give 5
->
>>>>> Version.LATEST.major-2 and 8 -> Version.LATEST.major+1.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can do those changes on Thursday if you don't feel comfortable doing
>>>>> them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le mar. 27 juin 2017 à 08:12, Anshum Gupta <anshumg@apple.com>
a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Without making any changes at all and just bumping up the version,
I
>>>>>> hit these errors when running the tests:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    [junit4]   2> NOTE: reproduce with: ant test
>>>>>> -Dtestcase=TestSegmentInfos -Dtests.method=testIllegalCreatedVersion
>>>>>> -Dtests.seed=C818A61FA6C293A1 -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.locale=es-PR
>>>>>> -Dtests.timezone=Etc/GMT+4 -Dtests.asserts=true
>>>>>> -Dtests.file.encoding=US-ASCII
>>>>>>    [junit4] FAILURE 0.01s J0 |
>>>>>> TestSegmentInfos.testIllegalCreatedVersion <<<
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > Throwable #1: junit.framework.AssertionFailedError:
>>>>>> Expected exception IllegalArgumentException but no exception was
thrown
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([C818A61FA6C293A1:CE340683BE44C211]:0)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.expectThrows(LuceneTestCase.java:2672)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testIllegalCreatedVersion(TestSegmentInfos.java:35)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
>>>>>>    [junit4]   2> NOTE: reproduce with: ant test
>>>>>> -Dtestcase=TestSegmentInfos -Dtests.method=testVersionsOneSegment
>>>>>> -Dtests.seed=C818A61FA6C293A1 -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.locale=es-PR
>>>>>> -Dtests.timezone=Etc/GMT+4 -Dtests.asserts=true
>>>>>> -Dtests.file.encoding=US-ASCII
>>>>>>    [junit4] ERROR   0.00s J0 |
>>>>>> TestSegmentInfos.testVersionsOneSegment <<<
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > Throwable #1:
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.CorruptIndexException: segments file recorded
>>>>>> indexCreatedVersionMajor=8 but segment=_0(7.0.0):C1 has older version=7.0.0
>>>>>> (resource=BufferedChecksumIndexInput(MockIndexInputWrapper(RAMInputStream(name=segments_1))))
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([C818A61FA6C293A1:A7477EE8875F2E36]:0)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCommit(SegmentInfos.java:392)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCommit(SegmentInfos.java:293)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$1.doBody(SegmentInfos.java:443)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$1.doBody(SegmentInfos.java:440)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$FindSegmentsFile.run(SegmentInfos.java:692)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$FindSegmentsFile.run(SegmentInfos.java:644)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readLatestCommit(SegmentInfos.java:445)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testVersionsOneSegment(TestSegmentInfos.java:67)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
>>>>>>    [junit4]   2> NOTE: reproduce with: ant test
>>>>>> -Dtestcase=TestSegmentInfos -Dtests.method=testVersionsTwoSegments
>>>>>> -Dtests.seed=C818A61FA6C293A1 -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.locale=es-PR
>>>>>> -Dtests.timezone=Etc/GMT+4 -Dtests.asserts=true
>>>>>> -Dtests.file.encoding=US-ASCII
>>>>>>    [junit4] ERROR   0.00s J0 |
>>>>>> TestSegmentInfos.testVersionsTwoSegments <<<
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > Throwable #1:
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.CorruptIndexException: segments file recorded
>>>>>> indexCreatedVersionMajor=8 but segment=_0(7.0.0):C1 has older version=7.0.0
>>>>>> (resource=BufferedChecksumIndexInput(MockIndexInputWrapper(RAMInputStream(name=segments_1))))
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([C818A61FA6C293A1:4EE9CC4194FBB648]:0)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCommit(SegmentInfos.java:392)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readCommit(SegmentInfos.java:293)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$1.doBody(SegmentInfos.java:443)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$1.doBody(SegmentInfos.java:440)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$FindSegmentsFile.run(SegmentInfos.java:692)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos$FindSegmentsFile.run(SegmentInfos.java:644)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentInfos.readLatestCommit(SegmentInfos.java:445)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testVersionsTwoSegments(TestSegmentInfos.java:96)
>>>>>>    [junit4]    > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On applying the patch here (https://pastebin.com/tM4Fpy1Q), I end
up
>>>>>> with the following errors:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    [junit4] Tests with failures [seed: 5B388AB1E2BEFF87]:
>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.search.similarities.TestSimilarityBase.testLengthEncodingBackwardCompatibility
>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.search.similarities.TestClassicSimilarity.testNormEncodingBackwardCompatibility
>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testIllegalCreatedVersion
>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.search.similarities.TestBM25Similarity.testLengthEncodingBackwardCompatibility
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas on what I’m missing here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Ryan Ernst <ryan@iernst.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After changing that constant check, do you get the same test
>>>>>> failures? What are the actual failure messages?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 10:38 AM Anshum Gupta <anshum@anshumgupta.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Adrien, sadly, the tests aren't passing. That's the reason
>>>>>>> why I didn't push the changes. I'll see if someone else can help
while
>>>>>>> you're away.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:55 AM Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your proposed change looks correct to me. As far as whether
other
>>>>>>>> changes are required, I'm currently traveling but can look
when I'm back on
>>>>>>>> Thursday. Feel free to push the branches if tests are passing,
we can fix
>>>>>>>> things later?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le lun. 26 juin 2017 à 07:13, Anshum Gupta <anshum@anshumgupta.net>
>>>>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only throw case that I think needs changing is in
>>>>>>>>> SegmentInfos.java L315
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Version luceneVersion = Version.fromBits(input.readVInt(),
input.readVInt(), input.readVInt());
>>>>>>>>> if (luceneVersion.onOrAfter(Version.LUCENE_7_0_0) ==
false) {
>>>>>>>>>   // TODO: should we check indexCreatedVersion instead?
>>>>>>>>>   throw new IndexFormatTooOldException(input, "this index
is too old (version: " + luceneVersion + ")");
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Lucene version here should be LUCENE_7_0_0, instead
of the
>>>>>>>>> original LUCENE_6_0_0.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that's needed (and is this the
correct
>>>>>>>>> change?).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 9:45 PM Anshum Gupta <
>>>>>>>>> anshum@anshumgupta.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am working on creating the 7x, and 7.0 branches
but I have the
>>>>>>>>>> following failing tests:
>>>>>>>>>>    [junit4] Tests with failures [seed: 4FBDDCD3F96316D3]:
>>>>>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testVersionsTwoSegments
>>>>>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testIllegalCreatedVersion
>>>>>>>>>>    [junit4]   -
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestSegmentInfos.testVersionsOneSegment
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I assume this is a result of me not doing anything
about the
>>>>>>>>>> following TODO that got printed when I ran addVersion.py.
>>>>>>>>>> *TODO*
>>>>>>>>>> *  - Update IndexFormatTooOldException throw cases*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can someone shed more light on what needs to be done
here?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> --
> Uwe Schindler
> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
> https://www.thetaphi.de
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message