[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12770127#action_12770127 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- OK, will do it a later in the evening (MEZ), have no time now. I will also add a good changes.txt entry in behaviour change or like that. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.cfs.zip, > index.29.nocfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip, > lucene-1960-1-branch29.patch, lucene-1960-1-branch29.patch, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12770122#action_12770122
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
I can commit this, if everybody is happy (because I have the zip files already
in my checkout added). Or will you do it, Michael?
{quote}
Go ahead!
Cool that you added the bw-test. I've been wanting to do that too, but I didn't
have time yet. Thank you!
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.cfs.zip,
> index.29.nocfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip,
> lucene-1960-1-branch29.patch, lucene-1960-1-branch29.patch,
> lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch,
> lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch,
> lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12770054#action_12770054 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- After thinking a little bit about it: Is it ok to test the size of the compressed field by recompressing it with another target VM? E.g., maybe I created the test 2.9 index with another Java Version (1.5.0_21) where the deflate function is a little bit different implemented and so the test in 3.0 will fail, because maybe someone with Java 6 ran the test using another libzip? In this case, I would add another stored field in the test index, that contains the length of the compressed data during creation of the index in the source VM, to be checked with FieldSelectorResult.SIZE? Opinions? > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip, > index.29.nocfs.zip, lucene-1960-1-branch29.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12770011#action_12770011 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- OK. I will post new test indexes and a new patch, because I want to also test binary stored fields. I will do it by creating a binary/string field for id%2==0 or 1. The patch for the index creating must be committed to 2.9 branch, not the backwards tests (because COMPRESS is undefined there, too!) > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12770007#action_12770007 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1960: bq. Should I commit the index creation to the current 2.9 branch or not? +1, and ideally also, commented out, in trunk > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: index.29.cfs.zip, index.29.nocfs.zip, > lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769981#action_12769981
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
I am working on it. I already patched the 2.9 version and created the test
index.
In 3.0 I use if dirName.startsWith("29.") to only do the optimize tests for
this index and no other version.
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch,
> lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769978#action_12769978 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1960: bq. Should we add some testcase in TestBackwardsCompatibility +1, that'd be great What I usually do is make a mod that creates compressed fields, in the prior release (2.9.x), then uncomment the two methods that create new back compat indexes, zip them up, carry them forward to trunk, and modify the trunk test to test them. Best to also carry forward the code that generated the back compat index, though in this since COMPRESS is removed, you'll have to comment it out w/ a comment stating "this was used in 2.9 to create field XXX". > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769971#action_12769971 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- For this case: Should we add some testcase in TestBackwardsCompatibility, that tests, that pre 3.0 indexes with compressed fields are correctly uncompressed on optimize and also can be correctly read? I do not know how to do this and if the current BW test indexes in the zip files contain compressed fields. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769969#action_12769969 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Will do! > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769966#action_12769966 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1960: bq. I do not know if this is a bug in 2.9.0, but it seems that segments with all documents deleted are not automatically removed Lucene doesn't actually short-circuit this case, ie, if every single doc in a given segment has been deleted, it will still merge it [away] like normal, rather than simply dropping it immediately from the index, which I agree would be a simple optimization. Can you open a new issue? I would think IW can drop such a segment immediately (ie not wait for a merge or optimize) on flushing new deletes. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769946#action_12769946
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
I do not know if this is a bug in 2.9.0, but it seems that segments with all
documents deleted are not automatically removed:
{code}
2009-10-24 17:08:15,264 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - 4 of 14:
name=_dlo docCount=5
2009-10-24 17:08:15,264 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex -
compound=true
2009-10-24 17:08:15,264 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex -
hasProx=true
2009-10-24 17:08:15,264 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - numFiles=2
2009-10-24 17:08:15,265 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - size
(MB)=0.059
2009-10-24 17:08:15,265 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex -
diagnostics = {java.version=1.5.0_21, lucene.version=2.9.0 817268P - 2009-09-21
10:25:09, os=SunOS, os.arch=amd64, java.vendor=Sun Microsystems Inc.,
os.version=5.10, source=flush}
2009-10-24 17:08:15,265 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - has
deletions [delFileName=_dlo_1.del]
2009-10-24 17:08:15,356 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - test:
open reader.OK [5 deleted docs]
2009-10-24 17:08:15,356 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - test:
fields..OK [136 fields]
2009-10-24 17:08:15,357 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - test:
field norms.OK [136 fields]
2009-10-24 17:08:15,372 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - test:
terms, freq, prox...OK [1698 terms; 4236 terms/docs pairs; 0 tokens]
2009-10-24 17:08:15,373 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - test:
stored fields...OK [0 total field count; avg ? fields per doc]
2009-10-24 17:08:15,373 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - test:
term vectorsOK [0 total vector count; avg ? term/freq vector fields per
doc]
{code}
Shouldn't such segments not be removed automatically during the next merge?
But this would be another issue. In my opinion, we are fine with the current
approach, the longer optimization time is rectified by the larger index size
because of no compression anymore and the more heavyer initial merge without
addRawDocument is only 30% slower (one time!).
+1 for committing
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch,
> lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769683#action_12769683 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- I forgot the infos about the used system: Sun X4600 Server, 16 Cores, 32 GB RAM, 64 bit JVM 1.5.0_21, -Xmx1512M, RAID 5 > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960-1.patch, > lucene-1960.patch, optimize-time.txt > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769531#action_12769531 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- I have some large indexes here from 2.9 with compressed XML documents in stored fields. I can compare the optimization time for Lucene 2.9 and Lucene 3.0 with your patch. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769527#action_12769527 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Yes, I believe this would work. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769528#action_12769528 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Then +1 from me! > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769520#action_12769520 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- So the idea is to raise the version number of the stored fields file by one in 3.0. All new or merged segments get this version number? When merging, for all versions before the actual one we do not use addRawDocuments() when copying contents. The current lucene-1960-1.patch stays unchanged. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769517#action_12769517
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
But this is only one-time. As soon as it is optimized it is fast again. Because
of that I said, one could use a tool to enforce optimization or the new
IndexSplitter can also do the copy old to new index.
{quote}
That's right, I'm just trying to make sure we all understand the consequences.
Would be nice to know how much longer it takes though.
If everyone else is ok with this approach I can work on a patch.
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769511#action_12769511
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
Or better, we look into the FieldInfos of the segment-to-merge and look if
there is the compressed flag set for one of the fields.
{quote}
For a second earlier I had the same idea - it would be the most convenient
solution. BUT: bummer! no compressed flag in the fieldinfos...
It's a bit per stored field *instance*.
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769510#action_12769510 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- But this is only one-time. As soon as it is optimized it is fast again. Because of that I said, one could use a tool to enforce optimization or the new IndexSplitter can also do the copy old to new index. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769507#action_12769507
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
Can't we detect that we're dealing w/ an older version segment and not use
addRawDocuments when merging them (and uncompress when we merge)?
{quote}
So then any 2.x index (including 2.9) would not be merged in the optimized way
with 3.x. I'm actually not even sure how much of a slowdown this is. Did you
(or anyone else) ever measure that?
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769503#action_12769503 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Good idea, from where take the version? Or better, we look into the FieldInfos of the segment-to-merge and look if there is the compressed flag set for one of the fields. If yes, do not use addRawDocuments. It there the possibility to see this flag also or'ed segment-wise (like a field is omitNors is per-segment)? > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769499#action_12769499 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Right, because FieldsReader#rawDocs() does not decode the field bits, so it doesn't know which fields are compressed. If we want to change that it would have a significant negative performance impact on *all* stored fields. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769497#action_12769497 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1960: Can't we detect that we're dealing w/ an older version segment and not use addRawDocuments when merging them (and uncompress when we merge)? > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769494#action_12769494 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- And how about keeping the current lucene-1960-1.patch? It works for me as I exspected. The only problem is that we do not decompress the fields for sure on optimizing? > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769490#action_12769490 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960: --- I'm actually -1 for option 1). The whole implementation of addRawDocuments() would have to change, and the necessary changes would kind of defeat its purpose. If we do 2) nobody will be able to use an index that has compressed fields in 4.0 anymore, and to convert it they have to manually reindex (which might not always be possible). Of course our policy says that 4.0 must not be able to read <3.0 indexes anymore, however normally users can take a 2.x index, optimize it with 3.x, and then 4.0 can read it without problems. This wouldn't be possible with 2). > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12769489#action_12769489 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- If we want to stay with the current patch, we place a warning that indexes can suddenly get bigger on merges. We note this in changes.txt. If one wants to regenerate the index with the stored fields decompressed, he could simply use the IndexSplitter contrib module recently added. This command line tool uses addIndexes and therefore merges all segments into a new index. With option 1, they get decompressed. If somebody wants real compressed fields again, he has to write code and reindex using CompressableStringTools. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12768916#action_12768916 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- I still prefer 1, but maybe it's not so good. Else I would implement 2 (even if we need FieldForMerge). Just remove the COMPRES flag that nobody can add any compressed fields anymore. 3 is bad, because it needs you to change your code on the change between 2.9 and 3.0 if you had compressed fields. In 2.9 they were automatically uncompressed, in 3.0 not. This would make it impossible to replace the lucene jar (which is currently possible if you remove all deprecated calls in 2.9). > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12765344#action_12765344 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960: --- How shall we proceed here? (see my previous comment) > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12764563#action_12764563 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960: --- I created an index with some compressed binary and String fields with 2.4 and verified that it gets decompressed correctly. The test fails currently on trunk (as expected) and passes with the latest patch. However, there's one issue here: the compressed field gets silently uncompressed during merge, *only* if in the less efficient merge mode that doesn't use FieldsReader#rawDocs() and FieldsWriter#addRawDocuments(). So now this doesn't sound like a great solution that we sometimes uncompress the fields automatically and sometimes don't. I think we have three options: 1. Change FieldsWriter#addRawDocuments() to uncompress on-the-fly 2. Revert the FieldForMerge changes too and never uncompress automatically during merge 3. Make it possible for the user to uncompress fields with CompressionTools, no matter which UTF format the data was stored with I don't really want to do 1., because it will have a performance impact for all fields (you have to look at the field bits even in raw merge mode). With 2. we will have to keep most of the compress/uncompress code in Lucene until 4.0, we'll just not make it possible anymore to add Store.COMPRESS fields with 3.0 (that's already how trunk is). For 3. we'd have to add a deprecated isCompressed() method that the user can call. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12764512#action_12764512 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Sorry, I forgot this one, will check tomorrow with some old indexes using compressed fields. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763729#action_12763729 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- I will look into this tomorrow morning. I am to tired now, have to go to bed. I will also check the implications of not having the FieldForMerge. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960-1.patch, lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763417#action_12763417 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- bq. I don't think the SegmentMerger should uncompress automatically? That'd make <=2.9 indexes suddenly bigger. If we re-add support for compressed fields, we have to also provide the special FieldForMerge again. To get rid of this code (which is the source of the problems behind the whole COMPRESS problem), we could simply let it as it is now without FieldForMerge. If you merge two segmets with compressed data then, without FieldToMerge it gets automatically decompressed and written in uncompressed variant to the new segment. As compressed fields are no longer supported, this is the correct behaviour. During merging, the compress bit must be removed. The problem are suddenly bigger indexes, but we should note this in docs: "As compressed fields are no longer supported, during mering the compression is removed. If you want to compress your fields, do it yourself and store it as binary stored field." Just for confirmation: I have some indexes with compress enabled (for some of the documents, since 2.9 we do not compress anymore, newly added docs have no compression anymore [it was never an good idea because of performance]). So I have no possibility to get these fields anymore, because I do not know if they are compressed and cannot do the decompression myself. For me, this data is simply lost. I think Solr will have the same problem. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763410#action_12763410 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- No problem. :-) I think it should not be a big task to preserve the decompression of previously compressed fields. Just revert FieldsReader changes and modify a little bit. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763408#action_12763408
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
The problem with your patch: If the field is compressed and you try to get it,
you would not hit it (because it is marked as String, not binary). The new
self-compressed fields are now should be "binary", before they were binary or
string. See the discussion in LUCENE-652
{quote}
Hmm I see. I should have waited a bit with committing - sorry!
I'll take care of it tomorrow, it's getting too late now.
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960.patch
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763403#action_12763403 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- In the discussion with Mike, we said, that all pre-2.9 compressed fields should behave as before, e.g. they should automatically decompress. It should not be possibile to create new ones. This is just index compatibility, in the current version it is simply not defined what happens with pre-2.9 fields. The second problem are older compressed fields using the modified Java-UTF-8 encoding, which may not correctly decompress now (if you receive with getByte()) The problem with your patch: If the field is compressed and you try to get it, you would not hit it (because it is marked as String, not binary). The new self-compressed fields are now should be "binary", before they were binary *or* string. See the discussion in LUCENE-652 > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763399#action_12763399
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960:
---
{quote}
Also the constant bitmask for compression should stay "reserved" for futrure
use.
{quote}
Yeah I think you're right, we must make sure that we don't use this bit for
something else, as old indexes might have it set to true already. I'll add it
back with a deprecation comment saying that we'll remove it in 4.0. (4.0 won't
have to be able to read <3.0 indexes anymore).
> Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
> --
>
> Key: LUCENE-1960
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Michael Busch
>Assignee: Michael Busch
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: lucene-1960.patch
>
>
> Also remove FieldForMerge and related code.
--
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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763389#action_12763389 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Users can use CompressionTools#decompress() now. They just must know now which binary fields are compressed. I don't think the SegmentMerger should uncompress automatically? That'd make <=2.9 indexes suddenly bigger. > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1960) Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12763352#action_12763352 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1960: --- Just one question: What happens with indexes that already had compressed fields. Do they behave as before? > Remove deprecated Field.Store.COMPRESS > -- > > Key: LUCENE-1960 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1960 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Michael Busch >Assignee: Michael Busch >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 3.0 > > Attachments: lucene-1960.patch > > > Also remove FieldForMerge and related code. -- 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
