You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@uima.apache.org by Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> on 2010/01/06 15:51:40 UTC

AW: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

Hello Eddie,

when trying the new 2.3.0 version of uimacpp yesterday, it turned out that the problem still occurs. Judging from the JIRA (issue: UIMA-1653), however, there is a fix for this. Could it be, that the test cases provided with the fix do not exactly reproduce the same behavior?

Regards,
Matthias


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2009 22:51
An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Matthias Wendt
<ma...@neofonie.de> wrote:
> I finally found out the difference between the two scenarios. My Annotator
> has "multipleReferencesAllowed" set to true.

Bingo! Problem reproduced here too. Is a bug in Xmi serialization
replies. Normally all features of a type to be sent are checked to
look for FS references. This check is done correctly for new types
created in the service, but missed for types received by a C++
service.

As you already guessed, a workaround with the current code is to add
the new StringArrayFS to the index repository. Will be fixed in the
upcoming release.

Many thanks for your time isolating this.
Eddie

AW: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

Posted by Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de>.
Hmm, seems as if this was just false alarm. The test works fine today. Must have been some kind of wrong configuration. Things get rather complex, when you're distributing them.

Matthias


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 15:28
An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

I cannot reproduce the problem with the latest code.
My test scenario is the one described in
http://markmail.org/message/zqmjfxad66mbssfy
with the addition of multipleReferencesAllowed to the type David in
DaveDetector.xml:
       <featureDescription>
         <name>variants</name>
         <description/>
         <rangeTypeName>uima.cas.StringArray</rangeTypeName>
	 <multipleReferencesAllowed>true</multipleReferencesAllowed>
       </featureDescription>

Can you try this scenario using your build, and if it fails, try again
using the binary build
at p.a.o. ~schor/public_html/uima-release-candidates/2.3.0-RC8/uimacpp/  ?

Thanks,
Eddie

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was using the 2.3.0 branch code, primarily to test the fix for the "deserializeCasFromXmi" bug sent by Christoph Büscher later in December. By the way, that test was positive :)
>
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 04:54
> An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as
>
> Matthias,
>
> Which 2.3.0 code did you use? The fix is not yet in the trunk, it is in
> /incubator/uima/uimacpp/branches/uimacpp-2.3.0/src/cas/xmiwriter.cpp
>
> Did you use a binary build?
>
> Thanks,
> Eddie
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> wrote:
>> Hello Eddie,
>>
>> when trying the new 2.3.0 version of uimacpp yesterday, it turned out that the problem still occurs. Judging from the JIRA (issue: UIMA-1653), however, there is a fix for this. Could it be, that the test cases provided with the fix do not exactly reproduce the same behavior?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com]
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2009 22:51
>> An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
>> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Matthias Wendt
>> <ma...@neofonie.de> wrote:
>>> I finally found out the difference between the two scenarios. My Annotator
>>> has "multipleReferencesAllowed" set to true.
>>
>> Bingo! Problem reproduced here too. Is a bug in Xmi serialization
>> replies. Normally all features of a type to be sent are checked to
>> look for FS references. This check is done correctly for new types
>> created in the service, but missed for types received by a C++
>> service.
>>
>> As you already guessed, a workaround with the current code is to add
>> the new StringArrayFS to the index repository. Will be fixed in the
>> upcoming release.
>>
>> Many thanks for your time isolating this.
>> Eddie
>>
>

Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

Posted by Eddie Epstein <ea...@gmail.com>.
I cannot reproduce the problem with the latest code.
My test scenario is the one described in
http://markmail.org/message/zqmjfxad66mbssfy
with the addition of multipleReferencesAllowed to the type David in
DaveDetector.xml:
       <featureDescription>
         <name>variants</name>
         <description/>
         <rangeTypeName>uima.cas.StringArray</rangeTypeName>
	 <multipleReferencesAllowed>true</multipleReferencesAllowed>
       </featureDescription>

Can you try this scenario using your build, and if it fails, try again
using the binary build
at p.a.o. ~schor/public_html/uima-release-candidates/2.3.0-RC8/uimacpp/  ?

Thanks,
Eddie

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was using the 2.3.0 branch code, primarily to test the fix for the "deserializeCasFromXmi" bug sent by Christoph Büscher later in December. By the way, that test was positive :)
>
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 04:54
> An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as
>
> Matthias,
>
> Which 2.3.0 code did you use? The fix is not yet in the trunk, it is in
> /incubator/uima/uimacpp/branches/uimacpp-2.3.0/src/cas/xmiwriter.cpp
>
> Did you use a binary build?
>
> Thanks,
> Eddie
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> wrote:
>> Hello Eddie,
>>
>> when trying the new 2.3.0 version of uimacpp yesterday, it turned out that the problem still occurs. Judging from the JIRA (issue: UIMA-1653), however, there is a fix for this. Could it be, that the test cases provided with the fix do not exactly reproduce the same behavior?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com]
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2009 22:51
>> An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
>> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Matthias Wendt
>> <ma...@neofonie.de> wrote:
>>> I finally found out the difference between the two scenarios. My Annotator
>>> has "multipleReferencesAllowed" set to true.
>>
>> Bingo! Problem reproduced here too. Is a bug in Xmi serialization
>> replies. Normally all features of a type to be sent are checked to
>> look for FS references. This check is done correctly for new types
>> created in the service, but missed for types received by a C++
>> service.
>>
>> As you already guessed, a workaround with the current code is to add
>> the new StringArrayFS to the index repository. Will be fixed in the
>> upcoming release.
>>
>> Many thanks for your time isolating this.
>> Eddie
>>
>

Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

Posted by Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de>.
Hi,

I was using the 2.3.0 branch code, primarily to test the fix for the "deserializeCasFromXmi" bug sent by Christoph Büscher later in December. By the way, that test was positive :)


Regards,
Matthias

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Januar 2010 04:54
An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

Matthias,

Which 2.3.0 code did you use? The fix is not yet in the trunk, it is in
/incubator/uima/uimacpp/branches/uimacpp-2.3.0/src/cas/xmiwriter.cpp

Did you use a binary build?

Thanks,
Eddie

On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> wrote:
> Hello Eddie,
>
> when trying the new 2.3.0 version of uimacpp yesterday, it turned out that the problem still occurs. Judging from the JIRA (issue: UIMA-1653), however, there is a fix for this. Could it be, that the test cases provided with the fix do not exactly reproduce the same behavior?
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2009 22:51
> An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Matthias Wendt
> <ma...@neofonie.de> wrote:
>> I finally found out the difference between the two scenarios. My Annotator
>> has "multipleReferencesAllowed" set to true.
>
> Bingo! Problem reproduced here too. Is a bug in Xmi serialization
> replies. Normally all features of a type to be sent are checked to
> look for FS references. This check is done correctly for new types
> created in the service, but missed for types received by a C++
> service.
>
> As you already guessed, a workaround with the current code is to add
> the new StringArrayFS to the index repository. Will be fixed in the
> upcoming release.
>
> Many thanks for your time isolating this.
> Eddie
>

Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as

Posted by Eddie Epstein <ea...@gmail.com>.
Matthias,

Which 2.3.0 code did you use? The fix is not yet in the trunk, it is in
/incubator/uima/uimacpp/branches/uimacpp-2.3.0/src/cas/xmiwriter.cpp

Did you use a binary build?

Thanks,
Eddie

On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wendt <we...@neofonie.de> wrote:
> Hello Eddie,
>
> when trying the new 2.3.0 version of uimacpp yesterday, it turned out that the problem still occurs. Judging from the JIRA (issue: UIMA-1653), however, there is a fix for this. Could it be, that the test cases provided with the fix do not exactly reproduce the same behavior?
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Eddie Epstein [mailto:eaepstein@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2009 22:51
> An: uima-user@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: compatibility issues of uimacpp vs. uimaj using uima-as
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Matthias Wendt
> <ma...@neofonie.de> wrote:
>> I finally found out the difference between the two scenarios. My Annotator
>> has "multipleReferencesAllowed" set to true.
>
> Bingo! Problem reproduced here too. Is a bug in Xmi serialization
> replies. Normally all features of a type to be sent are checked to
> look for FS references. This check is done correctly for new types
> created in the service, but missed for types received by a C++
> service.
>
> As you already guessed, a workaround with the current code is to add
> the new StringArrayFS to the index repository. Will be fixed in the
> upcoming release.
>
> Many thanks for your time isolating this.
> Eddie
>