uschindler commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2422935859
If you really want to change it, make it final. But it's not necessary.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHu
dweiss commented on PR #13926:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926#issuecomment-2423618479
Right... I forgot about that. If so then adding this to intellij will be
even more complicated because it'd have to be another module, with a different
set of compilation flags. Perhaps y
vsop-479 closed pull request #13928: Change StringHelper from abstract to final.
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928
--
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.
javanna commented on PR #13926:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926#issuecomment-2423129841
> Thank you for addressing this!
I wish I did! But I know that Chris has been looking at finding some
solution around having IDEs import these classes as source sets.
--
This is
jpountz opened a new pull request, #13931:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13931
I was looking at some queries where Lucene performs significantly worse than
Tantivy at https://tantivy-search.github.io/bench/, and found out that we get
quite some overhead from implementing `Boole
jpountz commented on PR #13931:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13931#issuecomment-2422772402
```
TaskQPS baseline StdDevQPS
my_modified_version StdDevPct diff p-value
Wildcard 159.36 (2.
shatejas commented on issue #13920:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13920#issuecomment-2422871076
Understood, so with not cloning we are avoiding any ambiguity whether the
original and other clones are getting affected or not. Not cloning makes it
clear that any thread using th
linfn commented on PR #13927:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13927#issuecomment-2423476433
> Ouch, thanks for finding it and fixing it. Can you add a test?
Test added. Let me know if anything else is needed.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To
vsop-479 commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2423382437
> it's not necessary.
I will close it.
--
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 g
wardle commented on PR #13261:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13261#issuecomment-2423217820
Hi all. I understand the change to a record class but this does create a
breaking change that would be avoided through the addition of deprecated
accessors matching the old class ie getQu
vsop-479 commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2422239762
Thanks @uschindler — Do you think it is necessary that just remove the
abstract modifier?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, pleas
javanna closed pull request #13926: Include java21 source folders to gradle
source sets
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926
--
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
javanna commented on PR #13926:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926#issuecomment-2423128918
> (but java21 folders can definitely be folded in).
I talked with @ChrisHegarty and he kindly explained that that is not the
case. it's complicated :) While we are on java 21, thes
benwtrent commented on PR #13651:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13651#issuecomment-2423186168
I will open a PR against Lucene Util to update it to utilize these formats
and show y'all some runs with it soon. But The PR is ready for general review.
--
This is an automated mess
javanna commented on PR #13926:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926#issuecomment-2421592171
I will close this then and figure out a different change for branch_10x and
main. Thanks for the help!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the me
jpountz commented on PR #13927:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13927#issuecomment-2421883503
Ouch, thanks for finding it and fixing it. Can you add a test?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use th
vsop-479 commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2421959479
I moved the private constructor to the beginning place.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL
uschindler commented on issue #13920:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13920#issuecomment-2421745757
> @uschindler On a high level it makes sense to me. I have a couple of
questions so that I understand this better
>
> > Add a method to Indexinput to change the IOContext (
dweiss commented on PR #13926:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926#issuecomment-2421819235
(but java21 folders can definitely be folded in).
--
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
dweiss commented on PR #13926:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13926#issuecomment-2421818871
Thank you, Luka. I think we may want to keep the build infrastructure for
mr-jars - just in case it comes in handy in the future.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Ser
jpountz commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2421863526
I believe that the abstract modifier aimed at preventing instantiation. Can
you add a private constructor then?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond
vsop-479 commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2421931690
> Can you add a private constructor then?
There already is a private constructor in it (line 66).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
rmuir commented on issue #13929:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13929#issuecomment-2422029281
I don't think we should optimize for abusive cases that are storing entire
novels in this structure. We should be optimized for real use-cases that use a
couple bytes.
--
This is a
iverase opened a new pull request, #13930:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13930
I noticed in BytesRefBuilder that we have growNoCopy method, still when
calling the methods #copyBytes (reseting the contents on the buffer) we are
calling grow. It seems more logical to use in that
uschindler commented on PR #13928:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13928#issuecomment-2422157253
I am not sure if this change is needed at all. There are multiple patterns
to make static only classes. The most important one is to add a private ctor.
The final or not doesn't reall
25 matches
Mail list logo
