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.

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

Upgrade to lucene-5.3.0. #13239

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 1, 2015

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@jpountz
Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 1, 2015

From a user perspective, the main benefit from this upgrade is that the new
Lucene53Codec has disk-based norms. The elasticsearch directory has been fixed
to load these norms through mmap instead of nio.

Other changes include the removal of max_thread_states, the fact that
PhraseQuery and BooleanQuery are now immutable, and that deleted docs are now
applied on top of the Scorer API.

This change introduces a couple of AwaitsFixs but I don't think it should
hold us from merging.

Upgrade to lucene-5.3.0.
From a user perspective, the main benefit from this upgrade is that the new
Lucene53Codec has disk-based norms. The elasticsearch directory has been fixed
to load these norms through mmap instead of nio.

Other changes include the removal of `max_thread_states`, the fact that
PhraseQuery and BooleanQuery are now immutable, and that deleted docs are now
applied on top of the Scorer API.

This change introduces a couple of `AwaitsFix`s but I don't think it should
hold us from merging.
@rmuir

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 1, 2015

looks great, +1

@dpursehouse

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 1, 2015

👍 I just did this change myself locally but you beat me to it.

jpountz added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2015

@jpountz jpountz merged commit 7bc1acf into elastic:master Sep 1, 2015

1 check passed

CLA Commit author is a member of Elasticsearch
Details

@jpountz jpountz deleted the jpountz:upgrade/lucene-5.3.0 branch Sep 1, 2015

@dpursehouse

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 25, 2015

Is there any possibility to include this in the 2.0.0 release?

@jpountz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Sep 25, 2015

@dpursehouse We are in the process of stabilizing 2.0 and this is a big change, so it won't be backported. The good news however is that we aim at releasing 2.1 relatively soon after 2.0.

jpountz added a commit to jpountz/elasticsearch that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2015

Fix spans extraction to not also include individual terms.
This is a bug that I introduced in elastic#13239 while thinking that the differences
were due to changes in Lucene: extractUnknownQuery is also called when span
extraction already succeeded, so we should only fall back to Weight.extractTerms
if no spans have been extracted yet.

Close elastic#15291

jpountz added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2015

Fix spans extraction to not also include individual terms.
This is a bug that I introduced in #13239 while thinking that the differences
were due to changes in Lucene: extractUnknownQuery is also called when span
extraction already succeeded, so we should only fall back to Weight.extractTerms
if no spans have been extracted yet.

Close #15291

jpountz added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2015

Fix spans extraction to not also include individual terms.
This is a bug that I introduced in #13239 while thinking that the differences
were due to changes in Lucene: extractUnknownQuery is also called when span
extraction already succeeded, so we should only fall back to Weight.extractTerms
if no spans have been extracted yet.

Close #15291
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.