serera at gmail
Nov 8, 2009, 10:58 AM
Post #5 of 5
(289 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: A report for "Not so important (but still is a) bug"
[In reply to]
|
|
Oh ... I missed 2.9.1? sigh
Thanks Mike
Shai
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Michael McCandless <
lucene [at] mikemccandless> wrote:
> I sure hope not :) I hope 3.0 is out soonish...
>
> But just in case, I've reopened & marked fix version 2.9.2, so if we
> ever do a 2.9.2 that'll remind me to backport.
>
> Mike
>
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Simon Willnauer
> <simon.willnauer [at] googlemail> wrote:
> > dude, will we have 2.9.2? :)
> >
> > simon
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Michael McCandless
> > <lucene [at] mikemccandless> wrote:
> >> We should fix this; I'll open an issue & dig.
> >>
> >> Somehow SegmentInfo.files() is being buggy, claiming _0.prx is a file
> >> belonging to the segment, when it clearly isn't.
> >>
> >> BTW we can't hold 2.9.1, since it's now "out" (as of yesterday) :)
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Shai Erera <serera [at] gmail> wrote:
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> I wanted to check something and wrote this very simple program, which
> >>> surprisingly failed because of a FileNotFound exception:
> >>>
> >>> Directory dir = new RAMDirectory();
> >>> IndexWriter writer = new IndexWriter(dir, new SimpleAnalyzer(),
> >>> MaxFieldLength.UNLIMITED);
> >>> writer.setInfoStream(System.out);
> >>> writer.addDocument(new Document());
> >>> writer.commit();
> >>> writer.close();
> >>>
> >>> It fails with the exception:
> >>>
> >>> Exception in thread "main" java.io.FileNotFoundException: _0.prx
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.lucene.store.RAMDirectory.fileLength(RAMDirectory.java:149)
> >>> at
> >>>
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.segmentSize(DocumentsWriter.java:1150)
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.flush(DocumentsWriter.java:587)
> >>> at
> >>>
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(IndexWriter.java:3572)
> >>> at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:3483)
> >>> at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:3474)
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:1940)
> >>> at
> >>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:1894)
> >>>
> >>> This happens on the latest code from trunk (and validated also against
> 2.4).
> >>> Seems like it's there forever. This only happens when I set infoStream,
> >>> because as part of the logging we compute the segment size. _0.prx is
> not
> >>> found because I didn't add any terms to the index. If I don't set the
> >>> infoStream, or add terms to the index, this exception is not thrown.
> >>>
> >>> Like I wrote in the subject, I don't think it's that important (for
> example
> >>> to hold off 2.9.1), but still a bug. Not a very important bug even, but
> I
> >>> can't get it out of my head that it's still a bug :)
> >>>
> >>> Can be fixed by making sure segmentSize() does not thrown any FNF
> exception
> >>> for missing .prx? Does not sound too safe to me. Maybe we just remember
> this
> >>> and tell people (like me) "even in silly tests, add a term to the
> document"?
> >>>
> >>> Shai.
> >>>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene
>
>
|
