lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yonik Seeley (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4276) refuse to execute on broken corrupting jvms
Date Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:13:34 GMT


Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-4276:

bq. > No, we still need an override. We do not always know best.

bq. What does this mean? if you don't supply this option, loops are broken and it creates
corrupt indexes.

You're still assuming that we know the best and only fixes for unknown and unseen applications
using Lucene in different ways. We don't.

First versions of workarounds can often be more crude (i.e. don't JIT this class or method
at all) and later refinements can be more targeted and higher performing, and depending on
the customer may even be in temporary binary patch form.  There are probably other cases I
haven't even thought of yet - which was really the point in the first place.  An unconditional
user override remains critical.

> refuse to execute on broken corrupting jvms
> -------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-4276
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Task
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 4.0
>         Attachments: LUCENE-4276.patch, LUCENE-4276.patch
> There are some jvms where we know lucene does not work at all and will just produce things
like corrupt indexes.
> We should detect this in a static block of and refuse to run at all.

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