[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10251?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
spike liu updated LUCENE-10251:
---
Attachment: LUCENE-10251-20211231.patch
> Add the compliant "Direct" doc
mocobeta edited a comment on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003258524
> There are some remaining issues with code doing:
Class.getClassLoader().getResource This code does not even work from inside
the same module and always returns null.
dweiss commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003310361
Yeah - we came up with the same explanation independently, Uwe. In my
opinion a simpler API that does not require special module-info clauses is a
preference (if it can be done in
mocobeta edited a comment on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003258524
> There are some remaining issues with code doing:
Class.getClassLoader().getResource This code does not even work from inside
the same module and always returns null.
mocobeta edited a comment on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003258524
> There are some remaining issues with code doing:
Class.getClassLoader().getResource This code does not even work from inside
the same module and always returns null.
cpoerschke closed pull request #1286:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1286
--
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-
cpoerschke commented on pull request #1286:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/1286#issuecomment-1003327759
Replaced by https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/480 PR.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003328772
> Yeah - we came up with the same explanation independently, Uwe. In my
opinion a simpler API that does not require special module-info clauses is a
preference (if it can be do
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003330092
Hi @mocobeta,
> > There are some remaining issues with code doing:
Class.getClassLoader().getResource This code does not even work from inside
the same module and al
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003330472
I changed back to "draft", once I am done, I switch back!
We can then merge to main and or your branch and solve conflicts.
--
This is an automated message from the Apa
mocobeta commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003341163
> The problem with your patch is that you change public API to suddenly use
relative resource names in public ctors. Instead we should deprecate those and
add InputStream taking
mocobeta edited a comment on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003341163
> The problem with your patch is that you change public API to suddenly use
relative resource names in public ctors. Instead we should deprecate those and
add InputStream
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003343605
> > The problem with your patch is that you change public API to suddenly
use relative resource names in public ctors. Instead we should deprecate those
and add InputStream tak
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003345402
> > > The problem with your patch is that you change public API to suddenly
use relative resource names in public ctors. Instead we should deprecate those
and add InputStream t
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003358980
Hi @mocobeta,
I cherrypicked your commit and modified it a bit: To still support full
names, it just prefixes all paths with "/". After doing this I was able to
revert the
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003365974
> In general a simple hotfix rule for
`Class#getClassLoader().getResource(xxx)` is: Replace by
`Class#getResource("/".concat(xxx))`
An alternative is `Class#getModule().
uschindler edited a comment on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003365974
> In general a simple hotfix rule for
`Class#getClassLoader().getResource(xxx)` is: Replace by
`Class#getResource("/".concat(xxx))`
An alternative is `Class#getMo
uschindler edited a comment on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003365974
> In general a simple hotfix rule for
`Class#getClassLoader().getResource(xxx)` is: Replace by
`Class#getResource("/".concat(xxx))`
An alternative is `Class#getMo
mocobeta commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003369484
@uschindler Thank you. I looked through the changes.
I can't look closely at or review the whole change soon since I have to
leave for a while (my father just passed away due
uschindler commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003380156
Hi,
> @uschindler Thank you. I looked through the changes. I can't look closely
at or review the whole change soon since I have to leave for a while (my father
just pass
mocobeta commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003386091
Thank you, Uwe. I am grateful for your kind concern.
Wish you all a Happy New Year!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, pl
rmuir commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003404788
> @uschindler Thank you. I looked through the changes.
> I can't look closely at or review the whole change soon since I have to
leave for a while (my father just passed away due
Feng Guo created LUCENE-10346:
-
Summary: Specially treat SingletonSortedNumericDocValues in
FastTaxonomyFacetCounts#countAll()
Key: LUCENE-10346
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10346
Pro
gf2121 opened a new pull request #574:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/574
CPU profile often tells SingletonSortedNumericDocValues#nextDoc() is using a
high percentage of CPU when running luceneutil, but the nextDoc() of dense
cases should be rather simple. So I suspect that it
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10346?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Feng Guo updated LUCENE-10346:
--
Description:
CPU profile often tells {{SingletonSortedNumericDocValues#nextDoc()}} is using
a high p
mayya-sharipova commented on pull request #536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/536#issuecomment-1003458911
@msokolov
> I seem to remember that when I checked (you can use -fanout parameter to
KnnGraphTester IIRC) most nodes were not fully populated; ie they had fewer
th
mayya-sharipova commented on pull request #536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/536#issuecomment-1003460979
> I think it would be prudent to check the size increase/decrease from this
change for some dataset/parameter choices
I've checked the index sizes and the size actu
mayya-sharipova edited a comment on pull request #536:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/536#issuecomment-1003460979
> I think it would be prudent to check the size increase/decrease from this
change for some dataset/parameter choices
I've checked the index sizes and the si
rmuir commented on pull request #574:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/574#issuecomment-1003466563
very interesting (and simple contained) find. cc @gsmiller @mikemccand , I
think this is an easy win? Thank you @gf2121 !
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Servi
rmuir commented on pull request #574:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/574#issuecomment-1003467123
This actually puts the taxo facets as running faster than SSDV facets? I
wonder if the same optimization is missing in SSDV facets countall? Or perhaps
there is a more complex expla
mocobeta commented on pull request #567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/567#issuecomment-1003475498
@rmuir Thank you, for your concern.
--
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
gf2121 commented on pull request #574:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/574#issuecomment-1003514413
Thanks @rmuir for so quick reply! Happy New Year :)
> just wondering if we miss to optimize the single-valued situation for SSDV
facets?
Thanks for remiding! I find we
32 matches
Mail list logo
