[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16356707#comment-16356707
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-7966 at 2/8/18 9:35 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Robert,
I agree. My proposal that I am working on: Let's clone the old StringHelper
methods to backwards-codecs (something like
{{LegacyStringHelper.bytesDifference}} and {{sortKeyLength}}) and change
backwards codecs to use them. So it might be slower when reading/writing old
indexes, but we are safe!
New indexes (that use same codecs like master) are fast and do better checks
(no failures yet on master).
was (Author: thetaphi):
Hi Robert,
I agree. My proposal that I am working on: Let's clone the old StringHelper
method to backwards-codecs (something like LegacyStringHelper.bytesDifference)
and change backwards codecs to use it). So it might be slower when
reading/writing old indexes, but we are safe.
New indexes (that use same codecs like master) are fast and do better checks
(no failures yet on master).
> 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
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Priority: Major
> Labels: Java9
> Fix For: master (8.0)
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-7966-v2.patch, 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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
