lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Amrit Sarkar (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-10229) See what it would take to shift many of our one-off schemas used for testing to managed schema and construct them as part of the tests
Date Fri, 21 Jul 2017 10:04:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10229?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16096085#comment-16096085
] 

Amrit Sarkar commented on SOLR-10229:
-------------------------------------

Though I have limited exposure of writing tests in Lucene / Solr project, I really liked the
new simple framework. It saves lot of time and is modular for each test method of test case,
making it meaningful. You don't have to scrape through entire schema to see attributes of
particular field-name / field-type used in a test method.

> See what it would take to shift many of our one-off schemas used for testing to managed
schema and construct them as part of the tests
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-10229
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10229
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>            Reporter: Erick Erickson
>            Assignee: Erick Erickson
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: SOLR-10229.patch, SOLR-10229.patch, SOLR-10229.patch, SOLR-10229.patch,
SOLR-10229.patch, SOLR-10229.patch, SOLR-10229-straw-man.patch
>
>
> The test schema files are intimidating. There are about a zillion of them, and making
a change in any of them risks breaking some _other_ test. That leaves people three choices:
> 1> add what they need to some existing schema. Which makes schemas bigger and bigger
and bigger.
> 2> create a new schema file, adding to the proliferation thereof.
> 3> Look through all the existing tests to see if they have something that works.
> The recent work on LUCENE-7705 is a case in point. We're adding a maxLen parameter to
some tokenizers. Putting those parameters into any of the existing schemas, especially to
test < 255 char tokens is virtually guaranteed to break other tests, so the only safe thing
to do is make another schema file. Adding to the multiplication of files.
> As part of SOLR-5260 I tried creating the schema on the fly rather than creating a new
static schema file and it's not hard. WDYT about making this into some better thought-out
utility? 
> At present, this is pretty fuzzy, I wanted to get some reactions before putting much
effort into it. I expect that the utility methods would eventually get a bunch of canned types.
It's reasonably straightforward for primitive types, if lengthy. But when you get into solr.TextField-based
types it gets less straight-forward.
> We could manage to just move the "intimidation" from the plethora of schema files to
a zillion fieldTypes in the utility to choose from...
> Also, forcing every test to define the fields up-front is arguably less convenient than
just having _some_ canned schemas we can use. And erroneous schemas to test failure modes
are probably not very good fits for any such framework.
> [~steve_rowe] and [~hossman_lucene@fucit.org] in particular might have something to say.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message