[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14015659#comment-14015659
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
Commit 1599284 from [~rcmuir] in branch 'dev/branches/branch_4x'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1599284 ]
LUCENE-4371: remove bogus and bogusly placed assert
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.9, 5.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14015599#comment-14015599
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
Commit 1599275 from [~rcmuir] in branch 'dev/trunk'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1599275 ]
LUCENE-4371: move CHANGES entry
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.9, 5.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14015598#comment-14015598
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
Commit 1599274 from [~rcmuir] in branch 'dev/branches/branch_4x'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1599274 ]
LUCENE-4371: Replace IndexInputSlicer with IndexInput.slice
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 5.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14015580#comment-14015580
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4371:
---
Thanks! We need this backported for the ByteBufferIndexInput improvements.
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 5.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14000794#comment-14000794
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
Commit 1595480 from [~rcmuir] in branch 'dev/trunk'
[ https://svn.apache.org/r1595480 ]
LUCENE-4371: Replace IndexInputSlicer with IndexInput.slice
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 5.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14000748#comment-14000748
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4371:
---
bq. What javadocs? This is not a public class
You are right, because MMapIndexInput is private, too!
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14000737#comment-14000737
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
{quote}
We should add @Override here, because it now implements abstract method.
{quote}
Oh, thanks, I forgot this.
{quote}
I think we use the same FileDescriptor, so we also don't need to close the
slices?
{quote}
Slices are just like clones. So for example CFSDirectory holds an input over
the entire .cfs file, and when you ask to open a "file" within the cfs it
returns a slice (clone) of it. when you close the cfs it closes the real one.
{quote}
In ByteBufferIndexInput.slice() the return value is a package-protected class,
so we should change this to the general IndexInput like in the abstract base
class, otherwise the Javadocs will be look broken.
{quote}
What javadocs? This is not a public class :)
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14000722#comment-14000722
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-4371:
+1, this is an awesome simplification!
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14000715#comment-14000715
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4371:
---
Btw, thanks for hiding and making the concrete FSDirIndexInputs hidden and
especially final! Great step. The protected annoyed me for long time, but for
backwards compatibility I never removed them (although I am sure nobody was
ever able to subclass them correctly!).
In ByteBufferIndexInput.slice() the return value is a package-protected class,
so we should change this to the general IndexInput like in the abstract base
class, otherwise the Javadocs will be look broken. This applies to the other
classes and their clone(), too. The caller only needs the abstract IndexInput
(especially if the impl class is invisible).
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14000706#comment-14000706
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4371:
---
Looks cool.
I was a bit confused about ByteBufferIndexInput, because this one already has
{{slice(...)}}. We should add {{@Override}} here, because it now implements
abstract method.
I still have to think if close works as expected, but this did not change as
before. Maybe this is my misunderstanding, but it is really confusing:
Slices are always closed by consumer code (not like clones) or not? If yes, all
looks fine, but we should document this: clones do not need to be closed, but
what about slices? I think we use the same FileDescriptor, so we also don't
need to close the slices?
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch, LUCENE-4371.patch,
> LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13453322#comment-13453322
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
I agree Mike, i wanted to remove it... but I'm afraid!
I also dont understand why we have DataOutput.copyBytes(DataInput), and also
IndexInput.copyBytes(IndexOutput).
Is this all really necessary?
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
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
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13453320#comment-13453320
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-4371:
I don't think the default impl (SlicedIndexInput) should overrided BII's
copyBytes? Seems ... spooky.
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
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
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13453310#comment-13453310
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-4371:
+1
I think having II implement slice is much cleaner than Directory having to
implement createSlicer returning an IndexInputSlicer with only one method.
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
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
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13452245#comment-13452245
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
Well realistically I'm not sure we have to fix this for 4.0? We could do this
one later in a fairly backwards compatible/compatiblish way:
E.g. a good approach might be to make Directory.createSlicer just call
clone/slice.
Another safer alternative might introduce a minor break: by making that
deprecation final and having CFS code just use slice() directly,
listing it in the backwards break section. this would just be a minor break in
expert usage.
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
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
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13452166#comment-13452166
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-4371:
---
+1 to rermove the slicer! I was thinking about that the whole time and it
really makes it easier.
In general for 4.0, we should make the slice method abstract and *not* provide
a default implementation. In most cases its as easy to implement like clone().
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
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
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4371) consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13452001#comment-13452001
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4371:
-
fyi there are some things i dont like about it, and i didnt look at the
directories in misc/.
but its worth thinking about i guess.
> consider refactoring slicer to indexinput.slice
> ---
>
> Key: LUCENE-4371
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4371
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4371.patch
>
>
> From LUCENE-4364:
> {quote}
> In my opinion, we should maybe check, if we can remove the whole Slicer in
> all Indexinputs? Just make the slice(...) method return the current
> BufferedIndexInput-based one. This could be another issue, once this is in.
> {quote}
--
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
