Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Lucene: add context property to skip data integrity check #2198

Closed
jjezra opened this issue Jun 28, 2023 · 0 comments
Closed

Lucene: add context property to skip data integrity check #2198

jjezra opened this issue Jun 28, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@jjezra
Copy link
Contributor

jjezra commented Jun 28, 2023

Lucene performs many data integrity checks during indexing. These checks are not performed in other indexing processes. It might be a good idea to add a way to block it by a Prop switch.
jjezra added a commit to jjezra/fdb-record-layer that referenced this issue Jun 28, 2023
@jjezra
Resolve FoundationDB#2198: Lucene: add context property to skip data …
799aabb 
…integrity check
@MMcM MMcM closed this as completed in 3918fd5 Jun 29, 2023
jjezra added a commit to jjezra/fdb-record-layer that referenced this issue Jul 3, 2023
@jjezra
Resolve FoundationDB#2198: Lucene: add context property to skip data …
8cbc556 
…integrity check (FoundationDB#2199)

   Reverts commit 3918fd5
   Add static var to control checkIntergrity instead of the class var, allow caller to set it for all
jjezra added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 4, 2023
@jjezra
Lucene skip data integrity static (#2208)
5e91c5f 
* Resolve #2198: Lucene: add context property to skip data integrity check (#2199)

   Reverts commit 3918fd5
   Add static var to control checkIntergrity instead of the class var, allow caller to set it for all

* Set allowCheckDataIntegrity as static
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jjezra