chatman commented on issue #13003:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13003#issuecomment-2005698009
As an initial proof of concept integration to evaluate performance, we put
together a repository. https://github.com/SearchScale/lucene-cuvs
The benchmarks are against single
github-actions[bot] commented on PR #13143:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13143#issuecomment-2005421733
This PR has not had activity in the past 2 weeks, labeling it as stale. If
the PR is waiting for review, notify the d...@lucene.apache.org list. Thank you
for your contributi
benwtrent commented on issue #13191:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13191#issuecomment-2004940562
git-bisect says its this commit: b5795db0cf517f8942eed868752249df9b105603
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to
benwtrent opened a new issue, #13191:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13191
### Description
```
org.apache.lucene.facet.taxonomy.TestTaxonomyFacetValueSource > testRandom
FAILED
java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<10> but was:<9>
at
__randomizedtesti
shubhamvishu commented on PR #13187:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13187#issuecomment-2004568222
@benwtrent So should we instead wait for the pluggability support and
discard this for now? or Is it possible to go forward with this?
> What makes this PR doubly worrying is
msokolov commented on PR #13153:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13153#issuecomment-2004334853
after disabling this for fields with positions, luceneutil perf looks pretty
flat. I think it simply doesn't have any test cases that would exercise this.
I wrote a small benchmark tha
antonha commented on code in PR #13149:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13149#discussion_r1528679700
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/PointRangeQuery.java:
##
@@ -185,6 +186,13 @@ public void visit(DocIdSetIterator iterator) throws
IOException {
benwtrent commented on PR #13187:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13187#issuecomment-2004052748
> Though I'm not sure if this change conflicts with or makes things
difficult for the ongoing efforts to have pluggability (maybe @benwtrent would
be interested in sharing his thoughts
benwtrent commented on code in PR #13190:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13190#discussion_r1528642636
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/index/ConcurrentMergeScheduler.java:
##
@@ -281,11 +297,11 @@ public IndexOutput createOutput(String name, IOContext
conte
benwtrent commented on PR #13190:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13190#issuecomment-2004024374
@dweiss @mikemccand I am currently iterating on how to best make
`RateLimitedIndexOutput` `MergePolicy` and `MergeRateLimiter` thread safe.
Right now, it is all assumed that the
benwtrent opened a new pull request, #13190:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13190
This commit adds a new interface to all MergeScheduler classes that allows
the scheduler to provide an Executor for intra-merge parallelism. The first
sub-class to satisfy this new interface is the
shubhamvishu commented on PR #13187:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13187#issuecomment-2003991803
Thanks for the review @msokolov! The idea to make it pluggable seems
relevant and interesting. Currently it was not possible to use any custom
vector similarity function other than
shubhamvishu commented on code in PR #13135:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13135#discussion_r1528555456
##
lucene/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/lucene/tests/index/BaseFieldInfoFormatTestCase.java:
##
@@ -278,46 +278,50 @@ public void testRandom() throws Excepti
benwtrent merged PR #12915:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12915
--
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.a
msokolov commented on PR #13187:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13187#issuecomment-2003799323
There is some discussion how to make similarities more pluggable
https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13182 that seems relevant. Part of the
idea there is to accept ordinal values ra
benwtrent merged PR #13189:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13189
--
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.a
benwtrent commented on PR #13124:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13124#issuecomment-2003789175
I am going to revert the change and open a new PR for iterating a fix.
`RateLimitedIndexOutput` isn't threadsafe and our rate limiting assumes a
single thread.
With this commit
msokolov commented on code in PR #13135:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13135#discussion_r1528450684
##
lucene/test-framework/src/java/org/apache/lucene/tests/index/BaseFieldInfoFormatTestCase.java:
##
@@ -278,46 +278,50 @@ public void testRandom() throws Exception {
daixque commented on code in PR #12915:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12915#discussion_r1528440247
##
lucene/CHANGES.txt:
##
@@ -174,12 +174,14 @@ API Changes
New Features
-
-
* GITHUB#12679: Add support for similarity-based vector searches
benwtrent opened a new pull request, #13189:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13189
Reverts apache/lucene#13124
The reason for this revert is `RateLimitedIndexOutput`
`RateLimitedIndexOutput` assumes a single thread and is not multi-threaded
safe. Will revert the mult
benwtrent commented on code in PR #12915:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12915#discussion_r1528339145
##
lucene/CHANGES.txt:
##
@@ -174,12 +174,14 @@ API Changes
New Features
-
-
* GITHUB#12679: Add support for similarity-based vector searche
21 matches
Mail list logo
