You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@lucene.apache.org by "Robert Muir (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2020/07/22 19:14:00 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-9440) FieldInfo#checkConsistency called
twice from Lucene50FieldInfosFormat#read
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9440?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17163025#comment-17163025 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-9440:
-------------------------------------
I don't think its a simple case of duplicate call.
The one in the constructor is only called with "assert", so only when assertions are enabled. It happens for any fieldinfo creation. I don't remember the reason why its only called under assert, presumably to avoid some performance hit when fieldinfos are created by indexwriter.
On the other hand the second call (after deserializing bytes from the index) is called even in "production". So if we remove it, we remove the sanity checks alltogether for production code.
> FieldInfo#checkConsistency called twice from Lucene50FieldInfosFormat#read
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9440
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9440
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Affects Versions: master (9.0)
> Reporter: Yauheni Putsykovich
> Priority: Trivial
> Attachments: LUCENE-9440
>
>
> Reviewing code I noticed that we do call _infos[i].checkConsistency();_ method twice: first time inside the _FiledInfo_'s constructor and a second one just after we've created an object.
> org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene50/Lucene50FieldInfosFormat.java:150
> {code:java}
> infos[i] = new FieldInfo(name, fieldNumber, storeTermVector, omitNorms, storePayloads, indexOptions, docValuesType, dvGen, attributes, 0, 0, 0, false);
> infos[i].checkConsistency();
> {code}
> _FileInfo_'s constructor(notice the last line)
> {code:java}
> public FieldInfo(String name, int number, boolean storeTermVector, boolean omitNorms, boolean storePayloads,
> IndexOptions indexOptions, DocValuesType docValues, long dvGen, Map<String,String> attributes,
> int pointDimensionCount, int pointIndexDimensionCount, int pointNumBytes, boolean softDeletesField) {
> this.name = Objects.requireNonNull(name);
> this.number = number;
> this.docValuesType = Objects.requireNonNull(docValues, "DocValuesType must not be null (field: \"" + name + "\")");
> this.indexOptions = Objects.requireNonNull(indexOptions, "IndexOptions must not be null (field: \"" + name + "\")");
> if (indexOptions != IndexOptions.NONE) {
> this.storeTermVector = storeTermVector;
> this.storePayloads = storePayloads;
> this.omitNorms = omitNorms;
> } else { // for non-indexed fields, leave defaults
> this.storeTermVector = false;
> this.storePayloads = false;
> this.omitNorms = false;
> }
> this.dvGen = dvGen;
> this.attributes = Objects.requireNonNull(attributes);
> this.pointDimensionCount = pointDimensionCount;
> this.pointIndexDimensionCount = pointIndexDimensionCount;
> this.pointNumBytes = pointNumBytes;
> this.softDeletesField = softDeletesField;
> assert checkConsistency();
> }
> {code}
>
> By this patch, I will remove the second call and leave only one in the constructor.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org