[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5189?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13793521#comment-13793521
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5189:
--------------------------------------------
The test case changes look good!
This confused me:
{code}
+ } else if (!fieldUpdate || random().nextBoolean()) { // sometimes
do both deletes and updates
{code}
Shouldn't that just be its own if (not else if)? Otherwise I think the comment
is wrong ...
Also I think this:
{code}
+ if (liveDocs != null && liveDocs.get(i)) {
{code}
should be:
{code}
+ if (liveDocs == null || livedocs.get(i)) {
{code}
?
That's a great catch on forceMerge carrying the wrapped IOExc forward. Why is
jenkins not hitting this already...?
> Numeric DocValues Updates
> -------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5189
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5189
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Shai Erera
> Attachments: LUCENE-5189-4x.patch, LUCENE-5189-no-lost-updates.patch,
> LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch,
> LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch,
> LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch,
> LUCENE-5189_process_events.patch, LUCENE-5189_process_events.patch,
> LUCENE-5189-updates-order.patch, LUCENE-5189-updates-order.patch
>
>
> In LUCENE-4258 we started to work on incremental field updates, however the
> amount of changes are immense and hard to follow/consume. The reason is that
> we targeted postings, stored fields, DV etc., all from the get go.
> I'd like to start afresh here, with numeric-dv-field updates only. There are
> a couple of reasons to that:
> * NumericDV fields should be easier to update, if e.g. we write all the
> values of all the documents in a segment for the updated field (similar to
> how livedocs work, and previously norms).
> * It's a fairly contained issue, attempting to handle just one data type to
> update, yet requires many changes to core code which will also be useful for
> updating other data types.
> * It has value in and on itself, and we don't need to allow updating all the
> data types in Lucene at once ... we can do that gradually.
> I have some working patch already which I'll upload next, explaining the
> changes.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
