You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de> on 2004/09/19 13:28:00 UTC
Lucene 1.4.2?
On Saturday 18 September 2004 20:21, dnaber@apache.org wrote:
> order was undefined in case of duplicate sort keys, this could lead to
> incorrect results (documents appearing twice in the result set, other
> documents missing) if there were more than 100 matches. PR:31241
This bug could actually lead to incorrect results. So what about releasing
Lucene 1.4.2? Here is a list of fixes that could be part of that release:
-4. Fixed a bug in IndexWriter.addIndexes(IndexReader[] readers) that
prevented deletion of obsolete segments. (Christoph Goller)
-13. Fixed bug #31241: Sorting could lead to incorrect results (documents
missing, others duplicated) if the sort keys were not unique and there
were more than 100 matches. (Daniel Naber)
-There was a compile problem with StandardTokenizer.jj because of an
missing import.
Opinions?
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Christoph Goller <go...@detego-software.de>.
Doug Cutting wrote:
> To be clear, you are proposing that we branch from the 1.4.1 tag in CVS
> and re-apply the patches below? I'm not opposed to that, if you
> volunteer to do the work.
>
> I also agree with Otis that we should wait until we have a good solution
> to the Sort-related memory leak issue before we make a release.
>
> Finally, I don't think this is urgent. Except for #4 below, these bugs
> don't break applications that worked prior 1.4. The Sort-related bugs
> are bugs in a new feature that has never worked correctly. In general
> we should urgently fix bugs in code that previously worked correctly.
> Fixing bugs in new features is important, but a lower priority.
>
> Re #4: Did this fix a bug that was introduced in 1.4, or had the bug
> always been there?
It has already been there in Lucene 1.3.
Christoph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Wednesday 29 September 2004 23:17, Doug Cutting wrote:
> I just made the memory leak patch in this branch, but I've not yet
> updated CHANGES.txt.
I just did that. I also backported Christoph's change to
SortComparator.java and the wrong cast in FieldCacheImpl.java (that's not
documented in CHANGES, as it doesn't seem to trigger a bug).
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Saturday 02 October 2004 13:45, Christoph Goller wrote:
> > Too bad I found the first bug already: the CHANGES files describes the
> > new fuzzy syntax (e.g. fuzzy~0.7), but this isn't part of the release
> > (i.e. the QueryParser part of that feature is missing). Any chance to
> > fix this (i.e. change the CHANGES file, not the QueryParser). I guess
> > we should take more time for the next release.
>
> It is part of 1.4.2. I included all the changes on QueryParser.
Sorry for the false alarm, you're right. The bug with my test was on a
different level, the fuzziness got lost somewhere else.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Christoph Goller <go...@detego-software.de>.
Daniel Naber wrote:
> On Friday 01 October 2004 23:57, Doug Cutting wrote:
>
>
>>The new release is up at http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/.
>
>
> Thanks, I will submit it to freshmeat.net tomorrow. Should I also announce
> it on the mailing lists, as suggested at
> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ReleaseManager or do you want
> to do that?
>
> Too bad I found the first bug already: the CHANGES files describes the new
> fuzzy syntax (e.g. fuzzy~0.7), but this isn't part of the release (i.e.
> the QueryParser part of that feature is missing). Any chance to fix this
> (i.e. change the CHANGES file, not the QueryParser). I guess we should
> take more time for the next release.
It is part of 1.4.2. I included all the changes on QueryParser.
Christoph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Friday 01 October 2004 23:57, Doug Cutting wrote:
> The new release is up at http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/.
Thanks, I will submit it to freshmeat.net tomorrow. Should I also announce
it on the mailing lists, as suggested at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ReleaseManager or do you want
to do that?
Too bad I found the first bug already: the CHANGES files describes the new
fuzzy syntax (e.g. fuzzy~0.7), but this isn't part of the release (i.e.
the QueryParser part of that feature is missing). Any chance to fix this
(i.e. change the CHANGES file, not the QueryParser). I guess we should
take more time for the next release.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
On Oct 2, 2004, at 2:36 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> Daniel Naber wrote:
>> On Friday 01 October 2004 23:57, Doug Cutting wrote:
>>> It is not mirrored yet. Erik's the only one who has ever done that.
>>> Erik, do you have time to mirror 1.4.2? Thanks.
>> BTW, the release on the "official" download pages is still 1.4-final:
>> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/sourceindex.cgi
>> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi
>
> Right. The official site is the mirrored site. The procedure for
> releasing to the mirror is documented at:
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/convert-to-mirror.html
>
> Would someone else like to do this? Erik's been rather busy. If
> another comitter has the time, it would be great to get this done
> ASAP.
I just replied to Doug directly from a previous e-mail about the
release, and then read on as I'm digging out and caught this. I'm way
too swamped to get the release pushed out in a timely fashion right
now. It really shouldn't be too time consuming but I've not automated
the steps to sign all the files, so it takes me longer than it really
should.
Sorry for my weaker presence, however I have been hyping Lucene. Last
week I did a presentation at OSCOM in Zürich which was nicely attended
and received.
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Daniel Naber wrote:
> On Friday 01 October 2004 23:57, Doug Cutting wrote:
>>It is not mirrored yet. Erik's the only one who has ever done that.
>>Erik, do you have time to mirror 1.4.2? Thanks.
>
> BTW, the release on the "official" download pages is still 1.4-final:
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/sourceindex.cgi
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi
Right. The official site is the mirrored site. The procedure for
releasing to the mirror is documented at:
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/convert-to-mirror.html
Would someone else like to do this? Erik's been rather busy. If
another comitter has the time, it would be great to get this done ASAP.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Otis Gospodnetic <ot...@yahoo.com>.
One person also sent an email about Lucene JAR files not being in some
directory on one of the ASF servers. This is preventing Maven users
from getting the newest Lucene JARs. I still have the email and I'll
forward it to lucene-dev so that whomever pushes the release to mirrors
can take care of this issue, too.
Otis
--- Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de> wrote:
> On Friday 01 October 2004 23:57, Doug Cutting wrote:
>
> > It is not mirrored yet. Erik's the only one who has ever done
> that.
> > Erik, do you have time to mirror 1.4.2? Thanks.
>
> BTW, the release on the "official" download pages is still 1.4-final:
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/sourceindex.cgi
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi
>
> Regards
> Daniel
>
> --
> http://www.danielnaber.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Friday 01 October 2004 23:57, Doug Cutting wrote:
> It is not mirrored yet. Erik's the only one who has ever done that.
> Erik, do you have time to mirror 1.4.2? Thanks.
BTW, the release on the "official" download pages is still 1.4-final:
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/sourceindex.cgi
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/binindex.cgi
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
The new release is up at http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/.
It is not mirrored yet. Erik's the only one who has ever done that.
Erik, do you have time to mirror 1.4.2? Thanks.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Christoph Goller <go...@detego-software.de>.
Doug Cutting wrote:
> Christoph Goller wrote:
>
>> Items 4 and 5 don't seem that important to me. As far as I am
>> concerned we can leave them out.
>
>
> When did 4 happen? Was it a rare or common problem?
Actually, nobody ever complained about it, so probably nobody ever
noticed it. I noticed it when Bernhard complained about disk space
requirements during indexing, what eventually lead to my patches
4 and 5.
>
> I agree that we don't need to put 5 in 1.4.2.
>
>> So the only thing missing is your
>> optimization. Then 1.4.2 should be ready.
>
>
> I just committed this. I can make a 1.4.2 release later today or Monday.
>
> Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Christoph Goller wrote:
> Items 4 and 5 don't seem that important to me. As far as I am
> concerned we can leave them out.
When did 4 happen? Was it a rare or common problem?
I agree that we don't need to put 5 in 1.4.2.
> So the only thing missing is your
> optimization. Then 1.4.2 should be ready.
I just committed this. I can make a 1.4.2 release later today or Monday.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Christoph Goller <go...@detego-software.de>.
Christoph Goller wrote:
> Doug Cutting wrote:
>
>> Christoph Goller wrote:
>>
>>> I'd like the changes on FuzzyQuery, PhraseQuery, and PhrasePrefixQuery
>>> included in the branch. Any objections?
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm okay with these, but the primary purpose of 1.4.2 should be to
>> stabilize things, not to add new features. So let's be very selective
>> about what we add, and scrutinize changes carefully so we don't
>> introduce new bugs. Are you confident that these are "safe" changes?
>
>
> Yes, I am.
>
>>
>> If we agree to let a *few* features in, then I vote for my
>> optimization to IndexSearcher. Of all the optimizations I made
>> recently, the single biggest performance improvement was to avoid
>> allocating a new ScoreDoc for every non-zero score in
>> IndexSearcher.search(Query,Filter,int). I think this is safe. Are
>> there any concerns about putting this optimization into 1.4.2?
>
>
> Yes, I am also 100% sure that this optimization is safe. I would never
> have guessed that calling the constructor there could make such a
> difference.
>
> I looked through the list of changes since 1.4.1 and think the following
> items
> should be considered for 1.4.2:
>
> 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, 13, 16, 17
>
> The following items from my list are enhancements, not bug fixes:
>
> 2, 9 (FuzzyQuery, PhraseQuery, and PhrasePrefixQuery)
> 5 (peak disk requirements during indexing)
> 16 (your optimization)
I committed items 2, 9, and 10.
2 and 9 are my (and Daniel's) query extensions. I am 100% sure they
are correct. 10 is about a bug in QueryParser and some minor
QueryParser extensions that I did not want to pick apart from the
bug fix.
Items 4 and 5 don't seem that important to me. As far as I am
concerned we can leave them out. So the only thing missing is your
optimization. Then 1.4.2 should be ready.
Christoph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Christoph Goller wrote:
> I would never
> have guessed that calling the constructor there could make such a
> difference.
The improvement is greatest for OR queries that contain a common term,
i.e., which match a large portion of the collection. However for, e.g.,
most phrase searches and AND searches the improvement is probably not so
pronounced. When folks use Lucene as a vector-space search engine,
constructing queries that represent large weighted vectors, the
improvement is substantial.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Christoph Goller <go...@detego-software.de>.
Doug Cutting wrote:
> Christoph Goller wrote:
>
>> I'd like the changes on FuzzyQuery, PhraseQuery, and PhrasePrefixQuery
>> included in the branch. Any objections?
>
>
> I'm okay with these, but the primary purpose of 1.4.2 should be to
> stabilize things, not to add new features. So let's be very selective
> about what we add, and scrutinize changes carefully so we don't
> introduce new bugs. Are you confident that these are "safe" changes?
Yes, I am.
>
> If we agree to let a *few* features in, then I vote for my optimization
> to IndexSearcher. Of all the optimizations I made recently, the single
> biggest performance improvement was to avoid allocating a new ScoreDoc
> for every non-zero score in IndexSearcher.search(Query,Filter,int). I
> think this is safe. Are there any concerns about putting this
> optimization into 1.4.2?
Yes, I am also 100% sure that this optimization is safe. I would never
have guessed that calling the constructor there could make such a difference.
I looked through the list of changes since 1.4.1 and think the following items
should be considered for 1.4.2:
2, 4, 5, 9, 10, 13, 16, 17
The following items from my list are enhancements, not bug fixes:
2, 9 (FuzzyQuery, PhraseQuery, and PhrasePrefixQuery)
5 (peak disk requirements during indexing)
16 (your optimization)
Christoph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Christoph Goller wrote:
> I'd like the changes on FuzzyQuery, PhraseQuery, and PhrasePrefixQuery
> included in the branch. Any objections?
I'm okay with these, but the primary purpose of 1.4.2 should be to
stabilize things, not to add new features. So let's be very selective
about what we add, and scrutinize changes carefully so we don't
introduce new bugs. Are you confident that these are "safe" changes?
If we agree to let a *few* features in, then I vote for my optimization
to IndexSearcher. Of all the optimizations I made recently, the single
biggest performance improvement was to avoid allocating a new ScoreDoc
for every non-zero score in IndexSearcher.search(Query,Filter,int). I
think this is safe. Are there any concerns about putting this
optimization into 1.4.2?
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Christoph Goller <go...@detego-software.de>.
Doug Cutting wrote:
> Daniel Naber wrote:
>
>> I can try to do some of the work, but I'd need detailed instructions
>> for branching and tagging. It's probably easier/better if you do those
>> parts.
>
>
> I've never branched with CVS before either... so here goes!
>
> I've added a branch called lucene_1_4_2_dev. To get a copy, use:
>
> cvs -d :ext:XXX@cvs.apache.org:/home/cvs co -r lucene_1_4_2_dev -d
> lucene_1_4_2_dev jakarta-lucene
>
> Where XXX is your username at Apache. Then you can make changes and
> commit them from this directory.
>
> I just made the memory leak patch in this branch, but I've not yet
> updated CHANGES.txt.
>
> Doug
I'd like the changes on FuzzyQuery, PhraseQuery, and PhrasePrefixQuery
included in the branch. Any objections?
Christoph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Daniel Naber wrote:
> I can try to do some of the work, but I'd need detailed instructions for
> branching and tagging. It's probably easier/better if you do those parts.
I've never branched with CVS before either... so here goes!
I've added a branch called lucene_1_4_2_dev. To get a copy, use:
cvs -d :ext:XXX@cvs.apache.org:/home/cvs co -r lucene_1_4_2_dev -d
lucene_1_4_2_dev jakarta-lucene
Where XXX is your username at Apache. Then you can make changes and
commit them from this directory.
I just made the memory leak patch in this branch, but I've not yet
updated CHANGES.txt.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Wednesday 29 September 2004 22:14, Doug Cutting wrote:
> Now that we have a patch for the memory leak problem, should we start a
> 1.4.2 branch?
+1
I can try to do some of the work, but I'd need detailed instructions for
branching and tagging. It's probably easier/better if you do those parts.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
Daniel Naber wrote:
> On Monday 20 September 2004 18:49, Doug Cutting wrote:
>
>>To be clear, you are proposing that we branch from the 1.4.1 tag in CVS
>>and re-apply the patches below?
>
> Yes, exactly.
Now that we have a patch for the memory leak problem, should we start a
1.4.2 branch?
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Monday 20 September 2004 18:49, Doug Cutting wrote:
> To be clear, you are proposing that we branch from the 1.4.1 tag in CVS
> and re-apply the patches below?
Yes, exactly.
> I also agree with Otis that we should wait until we have a good solution
> to the Sort-related memory leak issue before we make a release.
Okay.
> Re #4: Did this fix a bug that was introduced in 1.4, or had the bug
> always been there?
I'm not sure, maybe Christoph can remember that (he'll be back in about a
week).
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>.
To be clear, you are proposing that we branch from the 1.4.1 tag in CVS
and re-apply the patches below? I'm not opposed to that, if you
volunteer to do the work.
I also agree with Otis that we should wait until we have a good solution
to the Sort-related memory leak issue before we make a release.
Finally, I don't think this is urgent. Except for #4 below, these bugs
don't break applications that worked prior 1.4. The Sort-related bugs
are bugs in a new feature that has never worked correctly. In general
we should urgently fix bugs in code that previously worked correctly.
Fixing bugs in new features is important, but a lower priority.
Re #4: Did this fix a bug that was introduced in 1.4, or had the bug
always been there?
Doug
Daniel Naber wrote:
> This bug could actually lead to incorrect results. So what about releasing
> Lucene 1.4.2? Here is a list of fixes that could be part of that release:
>
> -4. Fixed a bug in IndexWriter.addIndexes(IndexReader[] readers) that
> prevented deletion of obsolete segments. (Christoph Goller)
>
> -13. Fixed bug #31241: Sorting could lead to incorrect results (documents
> missing, others duplicated) if the sort keys were not unique and there
> were more than 100 matches. (Daniel Naber)
>
> -There was a compile problem with StandardTokenizer.jj because of an
> missing import.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Regards
> Daniel
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Otis Gospodnetic <ot...@yahoo.com>.
I am still using XEmacs and need to give Eclipse another try. The last
time I tried Eclipse, some 6-12 months ago, I remember seeing Eclipse
forcing garbage collection somehow. Thus, I would guess the
command-line behaviour is probably correct and there is indeed a bug in
Lucene's sorting.
Otis
--- Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de> wrote:
> On Sunday 19 September 2004 21:13, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
>
> > It would be good to take care of that memory leak issue that comes
> up
> > when people use sorting. Dave Spencer found one Comparator or Map
> or
> > something that looked suspicious.
>
> Yes, the "Comparator" WeakHashMap in FieldSortedHitQueue always grows
> and
> never deletes entries. I can reproduce that (i.e. the
> OutOfMemoryError), but
> only on the command line, not inside Eclipse. It looks like whether
> the class
> works without OutOfMemory depends on some implementation detail of
> the
> garbage collection.
>
> Regards
> Daniel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de>.
On Sunday 19 September 2004 21:13, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
> It would be good to take care of that memory leak issue that comes up
> when people use sorting. Dave Spencer found one Comparator or Map or
> something that looked suspicious.
Yes, the "Comparator" WeakHashMap in FieldSortedHitQueue always grows and
never deletes entries. I can reproduce that (i.e. the OutOfMemoryError), but
only on the command line, not inside Eclipse. It looks like whether the class
works without OutOfMemory depends on some implementation detail of the
garbage collection.
Regards
Daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Lucene 1.4.2?
Posted by Otis Gospodnetic <ot...@yahoo.com>.
It would be good to take care of that memory leak issue that comes up
when people use sorting. Dave Spencer found one Comparator or Map or
something that looked suspicious.
Then I'm +1 for 1.4.2.
Otis
--- Daniel Naber <da...@t-online.de> wrote:
> On Saturday 18 September 2004 20:21, dnaber@apache.org wrote:
>
> > order was undefined in case of duplicate sort keys, this could
> lead to
> > incorrect results (documents appearing twice in the result set,
> other
> > documents missing) if there were more than 100 matches. PR:31241
>
> This bug could actually lead to incorrect results. So what about
> releasing
> Lucene 1.4.2? Here is a list of fixes that could be part of that
> release:
>
> -4. Fixed a bug in IndexWriter.addIndexes(IndexReader[] readers) that
> prevented deletion of obsolete segments. (Christoph Goller)
>
> -13. Fixed bug #31241: Sorting could lead to incorrect results
> (documents
> missing, others duplicated) if the sort keys were not unique and
> there
> were more than 100 matches. (Daniel Naber)
>
> -There was a compile problem with StandardTokenizer.jj because of an
> missing import.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Regards
> Daniel
>
> --
> http://www.danielnaber.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org