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 <https://github.com/anshumg/lucene-solr/tree/upgrade-master-to-8> -Anshum > On Jun 29, 2017, at 4:18 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@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 <ansh...@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 <ansh...@apple.com >> <mailto:ansh...@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 <jpou...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:jpou...@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 <ansh...@apple.com >>> <mailto:ansh...@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 >>> <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 <ansh...@apple.com >>>> <mailto:ansh...@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 <ansh...@apple.com >>>>> <mailto:ansh...@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 <jpou...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:jpou...@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 <jpou...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:jpou...@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 <ansh...@apple.com >>>>>> <mailto:ansh...@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 <a...@flax.co.uk >>>>>>> <mailto:a...@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 <ansh...@apple.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:ansh...@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 >>>>>>>> <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 <jpou...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> <mailto:jpou...@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 <ansh...@apple.com >>>>>>>>> <mailto:ansh...@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 >>>>>>>>> <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 <r...@iernst.net >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:r...@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 >>>>>>>>>> <ans...@anshumgupta.net <mailto:ans...@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 <jpou...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:jpou...@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 <ans...@anshumgupta.net >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ans...@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 <ans...@anshumgupta.net >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ans...@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 <https://www.thetaphi.de/>