lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Lucene Java 3.0.0 (take #2)
Date Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:47:32 GMT
That failure can be ignored.

The test is old (was in the 1st rev of the book, but I've removed it
in the 2nd edition) -- it's asserting that building a tiny index using
compound file is faster than building one with multi file, which in
general is true, but for a tiny index the difference can be in the
noise.

Mike

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:32 AM, Helmut Jarausch
<jarausch@igpm.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> On 24 Nov, Andi Vajda wrote:
>> I built PyLucene trunk using Lucene Java source from the artifact's svn rev
>> and all unit tests and ported "Lucene in Action" tests pass.
>>
>> +1 !
>>
>> Andi..
>
> Many thanks, Andi.
>
> Here (AMD64, python-2.6.4) a single test fails
> java development with ant: 0.502968132496
> junit in action: 0.812919199467
> 0.812919199467: JUnit in Action
> 0.502968132496: Java Development with Ant
> /usr/bin/python samples/LuceneInAction/CompoundVersusMultiFileIndexTest.py
> F
> ======================================================================
> FAIL: testTiming (lia.indexing.CompoundVersusMultiFileIndexTest.CompoundVersusMultiFileIndexTest)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>  File "/Work1/Obj/Python/pylucene-build/samples/LuceneInAction/lia/indexing/CompoundVersusMultiFileIndexTest.py",
line 62, in testTiming
>    self.assert_(cTiming > mTiming)
> AssertionError
>
>
> Hopefully, this isn't critical.
> What could be the reason?
>
> Thanks again,
> Helmut.
>
> --
> Helmut Jarausch
>
> Lehrstuhl fuer Numerische Mathematik
> RWTH - Aachen University
> D 52056 Aachen, Germany
>

Mime
View raw message