Re: [I] TestShapeDocValues.testLatLonPolygonBBox [lucene]
msokolov closed issue #13531: TestShapeDocValues.testLatLonPolygonBBox URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13531 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [PR] Fix TestShapeDocValues.testLatLonPolygonBBox [lucene]
msokolov commented on PR #13743: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13743#issuecomment-2351686402 > its tricky to find some sane epsilon in this case (which would only skip running the test unnecessarily) I agree, and this is fine, but my intuition is there will be some fiddly cases very close to zero that will still fail incorrectly. I guess we'll see? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [PR] Fix TestShapeDocValues.testLatLonPolygonBBox [lucene]
msokolov merged PR #13743: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13743 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [PR] Remove 8 bit quantization for HNSW/KNN vector indexing [lucene]
mikemccand merged PR #13767: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13767 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [I] Significant drop in recall for 8 bit Scalar Quantizer [lucene]
mikemccand closed issue #13519: Significant drop in recall for 8 bit Scalar Quantizer URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13519 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [PR] Remove 8 bit quantization for HNSW/KNN vector indexing [lucene]
mikemccand commented on PR #13767: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13767#issuecomment-2351763664 > Also, we should backport this for 9.12? I think it's OK to make a hard break there for 8 bit quantization, since it's not working today at search time in 9.11 anyways? Actually, since these quantized `KNNVectorFormat`s are already marked `@lucene.experimental`, I plan on backport to also hard-remove the 8 bit case for 9.12 as well. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [PR] Use range optimizations for "slow" MultiTermQueries when terms happen to be contiguous [lucene]
gsmiller commented on PR #13693: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13693#issuecomment-2351893751 Thanks so much @iverase for the feedback! I wanted to approach this as a query rewrite initially, but I'm not sure it's all the feasible. The issue is that the ordinal mapping is segment-specific (potentially, at lest), and the rewrite would have to inspect all the segment-level doc values to determine if the range is contiguous. That's the issue I ran into at least. I also don't love exposing the scoring implementation publicly. It really is an internal implementation detail. Maybe there's a better way to approach this? I'm open to suggestions. I'm also open to dropping this if we think the exposure isn't work the semi-rare likelihood of the optimization. I just don't like leaving optimizations "on the table" when there's an opportunity to improve. Maybe I'm overlooking an obvious way to take a query rewrite approach? If so, please let me know. Happy to explore other avenues. Thanks again! -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
[I] Odd nightly error in buildAndPushRelease: NoSuchMethodException: no such method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle.linkToStatic [lucene]
dweiss opened a new issue, #13792: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13792 ### Description Out of the blue this happened: https://github.com/apache/lucene/actions/runs/10876597333/job/30176738581. The captured release.log doesn't contain much information other than this error: ``` BUILD SUCCESSFUL in 4m 3s 299 actionable tasks: 298 executed, 1 up-to-date FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. * What went wrong: java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: no such method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle.linkToStatic(Object,MemberName)long/invokeStatic > no such method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle.linkToStatic(Object,MemberName)long/invokeStatic ``` There is no associated stack trace. ### Version and environment details _No response_ -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [I] Odd nightly error in buildAndPushRelease: NoSuchMethodException: no such method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle.linkToStatic [lucene]
dweiss commented on issue #13792: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13792#issuecomment-2352106580 A subsequent run passed: https://github.com/apache/lucene/actions/runs/10878436971 I'll leave this open and maybe add a ```--stacktrace``` to gradle incantations from buildAndPushRelease so that we can see where it comes from. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
