[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16345192#comment-16345192
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-7966 at 1/31/18 10:16 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I worked today and made the branch on github up to date:
* It now applies the classfile patching to all modules, Solr was disabled (not
needed there)
* It runs tests in Java 9 with a modified classpath (it puts the patched
classes before the main classes), so we can actually also test the patched
stuff on Java 9. This "hack" just emulates a MR JAR file. It is a really dirty
hack, because it only applies this to the main classes. Of course, the tests
for our own implementations of {{Objects/Arrays}} classes is done in Java 8 and
Java 9 using Lucene's code, the hack just enables our unit tests that use the
Lucene API to use the native Java 9 classes behind the scenes when executed in
Java 9, so our production code is thoroughly tested. There is a new system
property of the test framework to ({{tests.withJava9Patches}}, defaults to
{{true}}), so you can disable this and only test our own {{Objects/Arrays}}
implementations, also on Java 9. To fully fix the classpath complexity we
should think about using the JAR files for testing and not build a classpath
with raw class files. But that's time for another issue.
I will now do some tests with Mike's luceneutils benchmarking tool. I just have
to fix it to use the JAR files instead of using plain class files.
was (Author: thetaphi):
I worked today and made the branch on github up to date:
* It now applies the classfile patching to all modules, Solr was disabled (not
needed there)
* It runs tests in Java 9 with a modified classpath (it puts the patched
classes before the main classes), so we can actually also test the patched
stuff on Java 9. This "hack" just emulates a MR JAR file. It is a really dirty
hack, because it only applies this to the main classes. Of course, the tests
for our own implementations of Objects/Arrays classes is done in Java 8 and
Java 9 using Lucene's code, the hack just enables our uint tests using the
Lucene API to use the native Java 9 classes when executed in Java 9. To fully
fix the classpath complexity we should think about using the JAR files for
testing and not build a classpath with raw class files. But that's time for
another issue.
I will now do some tests with Mike's luceneutils benchmarking tool. I just have
to fix it to use the JAR files instead of using plain class files.
> build mr-jar and use some java 9 methods if available
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7966
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/other, general/build
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Priority: Major
> Labels: Java9
> Attachments: LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch,
> LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch
>
>
> See background: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/238
> It would be nice to use some of the newer array methods and range checking
> methods in java 9 for example, without waiting for lucene 10 or something. If
> we build an MR-jar, we can start migrating our code to use java 9 methods
> right now, it will use optimized methods from java 9 when thats available,
> otherwise fall back to java 8 code.
> This patch adds:
> {code}
> Objects.checkIndex(int,int)
> Objects.checkFromToIndex(int,int,int)
> Objects.checkFromIndexSize(int,int,int)
> Arrays.mismatch(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int)
> Arrays.compareUnsigned(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int)
> Arrays.equal(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int)
> // did not add char/int/long/short/etc but of course its possible if needed
> {code}
> It sets these up in {{org.apache.lucene.future}} as 1-1 mappings to java
> methods. This way, we can simply directly replace call sites with java 9
> methods when java 9 is a minimum. Simple 1-1 mappings mean also that we only
> have to worry about testing that our java 8 fallback methods work.
> I found that many of the current byte array methods today are willy-nilly and
> very lenient for example, passing invalid offsets at times and relying on
> compare methods not throwing exceptions, etc. I fixed all the instances in
> core/codecs but have not looked at the problems with AnalyzingSuggester. Also
> SimpleText still uses a silly method in ArrayUtil in similar crazy way, have
> not removed that one yet.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
