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

Side-step pending deletes check (#30571) #30607

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 15, 2018
Merged

Conversation

s1monw
Copy link
Contributor

@s1monw s1monw commented May 15, 2018

When we split/shrink an index we open several IndexWriter instances
causeing file-deletes to be pending on windows. This subsequently fails
when we open an IW to bootstrap the index history due to pending deletes.
This change sidesteps the check since we know our history goes forward
in terms of files and segments.

Closes #30416

When we split/shrink an index we open several IndexWriter instances
causeing file-deletes to be pending on windows. This subsequently fails
when we open an IW to bootstrap the index history due to pending deletes.
This change sidesteps the check since we know our history goes forward
in terms of files and segments.

Closes elastic#30416
@s1monw
Copy link
Contributor Author

s1monw commented May 15, 2018

this is a backport of #30571

@cbuescher cbuescher added the :Distributed/Store Issues around managing unopened Lucene indices. If it touches Store.java, this is a likely label. label May 15, 2018
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-distributed

Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

@s1monw s1monw merged commit be587bf into elastic:6.x May 15, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
:Distributed/Store Issues around managing unopened Lucene indices. If it touches Store.java, this is a likely label. >non-issue
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants