issues  

Messages by Thread

• [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Unpack nibbles in dimension order [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] For 4-bit quantized vectors, should we change the scheme of unpacking nibbles? [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Use SkipBlockRangeIterator in TermOrdValComparator [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use SkipBlockRangeIterator in TermOrdValComparator [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use SkipBlockRangeIterator in TermOrdValComparator [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Unable to Tessellate shape for valid Polygon with several holes [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Unable to Tessellate shape for valid Polygon with several holes [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Unable to Tessellate shape for valid Polygon with several holes [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] deps(java): bump de.undercouch.download from 5.6.0 to 5.7.0 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] deps(java): bump de.undercouch.download from 5.6.0 to 5.7.0 [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] deps(java): bump commons-codec:commons-codec from 1.20.0 to 1.21.0 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] deps(java): bump commons-codec:commons-codec from 1.20.0 to 1.21.0 [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] deps(java): bump net.ltgt.errorprone from 4.4.0 to 5.0.0 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] deps(java): bump net.ltgt.errorprone from 4.4.0 to 5.0.0 [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Updated MIGRATE.md for CFS threshold API changes [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Updated MIGRATE.md for CFS threshold API changes [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] An attempt to make VectorizationProvider a dynamically selectable/loaded service [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] An attempt to make VectorizationProvider a dynamically selectable/loaded service [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] An attempt to make VectorizationProvider a dynamically selectable/loaded service [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Add a Character* equivalent for NFARunAutomaton [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Forbid java.util.Hashtable. [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Forbid java.util.Hashtable [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Revert "Optimize DocIdSetIteratorAcceptDocs#cost (#15592)" [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Revert "Optimize DocIdSetIteratorAcceptDocs#cost (#15592)" [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Revert "Optimize DocIdSetIteratorAcceptDocs#cost (#15592)" [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Revert "Optimize DocIdSetIteratorAcceptDocs#cost (#15592)" [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Remove unused MultiLeafKnnCollector and BlockingFloatHeap [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Remove unused MultiLeafKnnCollector and BlockingFloatHeap [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] trick to forbid Hashtable with forbiddenapis [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] trick to forbid Hashtable with forbiddenapis [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] trick to forbid Hashtable with forbiddenapis [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] trick to forbid Hashtable with forbiddenapis [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] trick to forbid Hashtable with forbiddenapis [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Should we switch IndexSearcher to use ForkJoinPool instead of Executor? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Should we switch IndexSearcher to use ForkJoinPool instead of Executor? [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Should we switch IndexSearcher to use ForkJoinPool instead of Executor? [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Reuse reader's fieldinfos [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use more efficient ArrayDeque instead of LinkedList [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Use empty array style to call Collection#toArray. [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use empty array style to call Collection#toArray. [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Replace pre-sized array or empty array with lambda expression to call Collection#toArray. [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Replace pre-sized array or empty array with lambda expression to call Collection#toArray. [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Fix missing jacocoAggregatedReport task registration [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix missing jacocoAggregatedReport task registration [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix missing jacocoAggregatedReport task registration [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Fix jacoco/coverage tasks [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix jacoco/coverage tasks [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix jacoco/coverage tasks [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] LUCENE-15668: Fix UnsupportedOperationException in WeightedSpanTermEx… [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix Highlighter crash by implementing getFieldInfos in DelegatingLeafReader [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix Highlighter crash by implementing getFieldInfos in DelegatingLeafReader [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix Highlighter crash by implementing getFieldInfos in DelegatingLeafReader [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix Highlighter crash by implementing getFieldInfos in DelegatingLeafReader [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix Highlighter crash by implementing getFieldInfos in DelegatingLeafReader [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Code coverage reports failing on main [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Feature/collaborative hnsw search [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Fix CachedExecutor thread pool leak on IndexWriter init failure [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix CachedExecutor thread pool leak on IndexWriter init failure [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Move TermOrdValLeafComparator to use SkipBlockRangeIterator [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Move TermOrdValLeafComparator to use SkipBlockRangeIterator [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Remove obsolete backward codec tests for Lucene 8.x index formats [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Remove obsolete backward codec tests for Lucene 8.x index formats [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Update documentation in Lucene104PostingsWriter [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Update documentation in Lucene104PostingsWriter [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Update documentation in Lucene104PostingsWriter (#15670) [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Update documentation in Lucene104PostingsWriter (#15670) [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Update Lucene104PostingsWriter level1skipdata doc count [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Fix method declared final in final class in Document. [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Fix method declared final in final class in Document. [lucene] via GitHub
• Re: [PR] Payload-stored position length intervals [lucene-solr] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Payload-stored position length intervals [lucene-solr] via GitHub
• [I] WeightedSpanTermExtractor is fragile to modern query rewrites due to DelegatingLeafReader limitations [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] WeightedSpanTermExtractor is fragile to modern query rewrites due to DelegatingLeafReader limitations [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] WeightedSpanTermExtractor is fragile to modern query rewrites due to DelegatingLeafReader limitations [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] WeightedSpanTermExtractor is fragile to modern query rewrites due to DelegatingLeafReader limitations [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] WeightedSpanTermExtractor is fragile to modern query rewrites due to DelegatingLeafReader limitations [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] WeightedSpanTermExtractor is fragile to modern query rewrites due to DelegatingLeafReader limitations [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Use bulk scoring in NeighborArray#isWorstNonDiverse [lucene] via GitHub
• Re: [PR] Use PriorityQueue instead of TreeMap in FirstPassGroupingCollector. [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] GITHUB#15654: Fix testDocValues to assert singleton behavior [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] GITHUB#15654: Fix testDocValues to assert singleton behavior [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] GITHUB#15654: Fix testDocValues to assert singleton behavior [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] GITHUB#15654: Fix testDocValues to assert singleton behavior [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] deps(java): bump com.diffplug.spotless from 8.1.0 to 8.2.1 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] deps(java): bump com.diffplug.spotless from 8.1.0 to 8.2.1 [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Backport "Fix MergedByteVectorValues internal ordinal tracking" to 10.4 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Backport "Fix MergedByteVectorValues internal ordinal tracking" to 10.4 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Backport "Fix MergedByteVectorValues internal ordinal tracking" to 10.4 [lucene] via GitHub
• [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [PR] Allow NumericComparator subclasses to implement their own competitive iterators [lucene] via GitHub
• Re: [I] TestMockDirectoryWrapper > testIsLoaded FAILED [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] TestMockDirectoryWrapper > testIsLoaded FAILED [lucene] via GitHub
• [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub
  • Re: [I] Lucene nightly benchmark regression on 29/01 [lucene] via GitHub

• Earlier messages
• Later messages