[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5152?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13733474#comment-13733474
]
Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-5152:
-----------------------------------------
bq. This would address my concern: the cost becomes O(N) not O(N^2). And the
coverage is the same?
The problem here is that we really need to check after we returned from the
cache and that might be the case only once in a certain test. Yet, I think it's
OK to do it there. I still don't get what you are concerned of we only have -ea
in tests and the tests don't seem to be any slower? Can you elaborate what you
are afraid of?
> Lucene FST is not immutable
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5152
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5152
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core/FSTs
> Affects Versions: 4.4
> Reporter: Simon Willnauer
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 5.0, 4.5
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-5152.patch, LUCENE-5152.patch, LUCENE-5152.patch
>
>
> a spinnoff from LUCENE-5120 where the analyzing suggester modified a returned
> output from and FST (BytesRef) which caused sideffects in later execution.
> I added an assertion into the FST that checks if a cached root arc is
> modified and in-fact this happens for instance in our MemoryPostingsFormat
> and I bet we find more places. We need to think about how to make this less
> trappy since it can cause bugs that are super hard to find.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
