Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of markrmiller@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.44.29 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=Yd2PBPIS0TX3GYPRlkqTCaOdUq/06Mb1Bz1K3zGXURpHUl+4gfSK1d4E5dPSW6tfPL
         axNk2jLm5OrS9e3JewhO35V3RwRhdsJ0lU8kKb6aXotzKa6ZUCLikBho66fNnJqDBxuQ
         LaPt4niZsmpAgtenX8x2ZxEaxRNFr6Nz2MvsE=
Message-ID: <4A146577.50607@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 16:17:59 -0400
From: Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090409)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene's default settings & back compatibility
References: <9ac0c6aa0905181406l5c951016k97a16d8db766716e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20090520150613.GA4351@rectangular.com>
 <4A1425BF.2050607@gmail.com>	 <c68e39170905200857u154418afsf7cb43d7f147c36@mail.gmail.com>
	 <9ac0c6aa0905200914t142dfd59hef160d26e879d989@mail.gmail.com>
	 <alpine.OSX.2.00.0905200933140.71522@yuzu.local>
	 <9ac0c6aa0905201210l2becda41ic5d51b22fca043e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <786fde50905201224i56c6184et463254a8aeb83949@mail.gmail.com>
	 <59b3eb370905201233r6fc40010mba929cd1c395a272@mail.gmail.com>
	 <786fde50905201240nafdba0bx237f6b818662b397@mail.gmail.com>
 <59b3eb370905201303s18a330cv3b57be15dc1d3223@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <59b3eb370905201303s18a330cv3b57be15dc1d3223@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> Earwin Burrfoot wrote:
> See, you upgrade either for new features, or for performance
>
> improvements. You have to write code for former, and you have to write
>
> code for the latter (because by default most of them are off).
> Mark Miller:
>   
>> If you have upgraded Lucene over the years and you never touched code to tweak performance, you still got fantastic performance improvements. You just didn't get them all.
>>     
> If you never touched the code over the years, your project is probably
> already dead
Does't alter the point though. You claimed that you missed the 
performance benefits if you upgraded Lucene, but you did not; regardless 
of if your project is dead, Lucene, with defaults, has seen large 
performance improvements over the years.

Many healthy projects have components of working code that work as 
needed and are rarely touched. Should we be bending over backwards so 
that those users can plug in a speed improvement a year or two down the 
line with no hassle? Thats a different argument - one thats happened 
many times over the years on this list. But users did see fantastic 
performance improvements without changing code regardless.

To the point of having to change a lot of code - right now you can 
easily pick and choose new features, defaults, and usually, upgrading 
lucene is fairly leisurely. When the flood gates open, and code is 
rolling all over the place, upgrading Lucene becomes less of a buffet 
and more of a pain in the a**. That said, I see the points and value of 
relaxing the back compat policy as well. Its been discussed a lot in the 
past, and it has been eased in the past.

-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org