lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (Commented) (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3526) preflex codec returns wrong terms if you use an empty field name
Date Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:09:32 GMT


Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3526:

There are more serious problems in 3.x here.

* if you create new Field("", ""), you get IllegalArgumentException from Field's ctor: "name
and value cannot both be empty"
* But there are tons of other ways to index an empty term for the empty field (for example
initially make it "garbage" then .setValue(""), or via tokenstream).
* If you do this, and you have assertions enabled, you will trip the same assert bug i fixed
in trunk here.
* If you don't have assertions enabled, you will create a corrupt index:     test: terms,
freq, prox...ERROR [term : docFreq=1 != num docs seen 0 + num docs deleted 0]

So we need to figure out what the semantics should be for 3.x. is Term("", "") allowed or
> preflex codec returns wrong terms if you use an empty field name
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-3526
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 4.0
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>         Attachments: LUCENE-3526.patch, LUCENE-3526_test.patch, LUCENE-3526_test.patch,
LUCENE-3526_test.patch, LUCENE-3526_test.patch
> spinoff from LUCENE-3473.
> I have a standalone test for this... the termsenum is returning a bogus extra empty-term
(I assume it has no postings, i didnt try).
> This causes the checkindex test in LUCENE-3473 to fail, because there are 4 terms instead
of 3. 

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see:


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message