[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1708?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12726563#action_12726563
]
Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1708:
-------------------------------------
I suppose, to be fair, we do mention that we might change runtime behaviour and
document it - its just that we don't usually say, code around it.
I guess its simple enough here thats its not really a big deal. I was just
surprised I saw no mention of back compat in the discussion other than Mike
mentioning that the change should be made through deprecation early on in the
attached email thread.
> Improve the use of isDeleted in the indexing code
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1708
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1708
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1708.patch, LUCENE-1708.patch
>
>
> A spin off from here:
> http://www.nabble.com/Some-thoughts-around-the-use-of-reader.isDeleted-and-hasDeletions-td23931216.html.
> Two changes:
> # Optimize SegmentMerger work when a reader has no deletions.
> # IndexReader.document() will no longer check if the document is deleted.
> Will post a patch shortly
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
