[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9888?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mayya Sharipova closed LUCENE-9888.
-----------------------------------
Closing after the 8.9.0 release
> Re-instate CheckIndex's attempts to confirm index sort is consistent across
> all segments
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9888
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9888
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: main (9.0), 8.9
>
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> [~rmuir] opened this awesome PR to enable ecj redundant {{null}} checking:
> [https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/44]
> But one of the chunks of dead code we removed from {{CheckIndex}} was spooky:
> [https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/44/files#r602733991]
> I think the intention here was to confirm that each segment's {{indexSort}}
> is the same, but because the {{Sort previousIndexSort = null}} declaration
> was *inside* the {{for}} body, it made the check pointless!
> I'll make a simple PR to re-instate the code and move the declaration outside
> the loop. Who knows, maybe fixing this long latent bug in {{CheckIndex}}
> will catch a fly? And maybe we could do some git archaeology to understand
> how the code became zombified?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
