Hi Alan,

I will open an issue about this!

Uwe

-----
Uwe Schindler
Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
https://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de>
> Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 4:57 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: getField vs getDeclaredField in analysis SPI
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> Would you open issue, I will take it!?
> 
> Maybe also post your opinion about think fix #1 or fix #2 is better. I tend 
> to go
> for fix #1. getDeclaredField() should theoretically be faster, but that won't
> matter here: If it goes the slow path (going up to superclass) it will fail 
> anyways
> and that's the exceptional case. A correct factory should have a NAME field 
> and
> its lookup is fast and the additional check introduced for the class is cheap.
> 
> Uwe
> 
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> https://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alan Woodward <romseyg...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 3:48 PM
> > To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: getField vs getDeclaredField in analysis SPI
> >
> > Thanks Uwe!
> >
> > > On 6 Sep 2021, at 13:11, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alan,
> > >
> > >> LUCENE-9281 moved the `lookupSPIName` method from
> > >> AbstractAnalysisFactory to AnalysisSPILoader; the method is mostly the
> > same,
> > >> but one line has been changed from Class.getField() to
> > Class.getDeclaredField().
> > >> This can fall foul of the Security Manager, which wants a higher level of
> > >> permission for getDeclaredField.  Was this an intentional change? As I
> > >
> > > This was intentional because the previous code wasn't fully correct, 
> > > because
> I
> > had some safety check in mind: The main reason for the getDeclaredField() is
> to
> > lookup the field only in this class; while getField() also looks into 
> > superclasses.
> > E.g. if the superclass has a NAME field because of a programming error it
> would
> > pick that up, which would be wrong. When investigating other
> > implementations using "named" lookups out there (even in JDK), they used
> > getDeclaredField() when accessing a static member.
> > >
> > > There are 2 solutions:
> > > - Change to getField(), but in the if statement below check the actual 
> > > class:
> > (field.getDeclaringClass()==service) (see https://github.com/apache/lucene-
> > solr/pull/1360/files#diff-
> >
> 6a65d91199a18bc4ee2d00a1e9dc283aedc4134846e0d7aafdc484f8263e250bR
> > 159-R162)
> > > - Wrap with doPrivileged in Lucene code. As far as I remember Lucene needs
> > the permission anyways. With doPrivileged you would delegate responsibility.
> > >
> > > I'd open a JIRA issue, I can fix this. It only affects Lucene 9.0.
> > >
> > >> understand it it’s looking for a NAME static field on the class in 
> > >> question,
> > which
> > >> should always be public. I’m in the process of upgrading elasticsearch to
> use
> > a
> > >> lucene 9 snapshot, and this change means that I need to wrap SPI
> reloading
> > >> code in doPrivileged() blocks, which is a bit of a pain.
> > >
> > > Thansk for doing this. Is Elasticsearch now using the Analysis Factory
> > framework instead of their own factories?
> > >
> > >> Thanks, Alan
> > >
> > > No problem,
> > > Uwe
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org


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

Reply via email to