Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-lucy-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 96228 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2006 07:49:22 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Jun 2006 07:49:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 96775 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jun 2006 07:49:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-lucy-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 96753 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jun 2006 07:49:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact lucy-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: lucy-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list lucy-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 96744 invoked by uid 99); 21 Jun 2006 07:49:22 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:49:22 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [12.154.210.214] (HELO rectangular.com) (12.154.210.214) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:49:20 -0700 Received: from [67.189.26.9] (helo=[10.0.1.3]) by rectangular.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1Fsxll-000DPC-UQ for lucy-dev@lucene.apache.org; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 01:09:02 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Marvin Humphrey Subject: Re: Problematic platforms Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:48:58 -0700 To: lucy-dev@lucene.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.750) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Jun 20, 2006, at 11:44 PM, David Balmain wrote: > If someone needs Lucy to work on one of those > boxes, it will just be a simple matter of them supplying us with > float2byte and byte2float methods. And tests, which we won't be able to run ourselves. >> I'm inclined to require both large file support and 64-bit integers >> for Lucy. What say? > > I'm not sure about large file support. You've looked into it more than > I have but I do think 64 bit integers are a must. I thought about replacing what would have been lucy_i64_t with lucy_off_t. One problem is how to fail reliably. I actually think we could pull it off without data corruption, since failure would first occur either when the compound file was written (and before the segments file gets altered), or at search-time, when the index first gets loaded. However, I just didn't think it would be a common enough case that it was worth coding and testing special versions of write_vlong, etc. > [aside:What I'm doing in Ferret is storing all file pointers as off_t. > As well as read/write_vint methods I have read/write_voff_t. The only > time I use 64-bit integers (ie always 64-bit unlike off_t which could > be 32-bit) is when I need to write a fixed byte size pointer like in > the fields and term_vectors index files. I've only just implemented > this but it seems to be working.] This is one of the main things we need Configurator for. We need to figure out whether off_t is 32-bit or 64-bit. We need to figure out whether the OS is supplying ftello64, whether ftello returns a 64-bit off_t, etc. Marvin Humphrey Rectangular Research http://www.rectangular.com/