-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix compile errors #101874
Merged
javanna
merged 9 commits into
elastic:lucene_snapshot
from
javanna:fix/lucene_90_postings_format
Nov 9, 2023
+16
−11
Merged
Fix compile errors #101874
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8272824
Fix compile error
javanna a7019c0
iter
javanna 331dd92
iter
javanna e3e5004
iter
javanna fd5d711
iter
javanna 943de8b
iter
javanna a1035ac
iter
javanna d13c8c1
Merge branch 'lucene_snapshot' into fix/lucene_90_postings_format
javanna 120f35c
iter
javanna File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not sure if besides updating the import for 90 we need an additional conditional for 99 here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems like we should have one. I honestly don't know, we have one for other older formats :/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So we don't forget, could you make that change in this PR or add a TODO?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I pushed the change, I don't feel good about no failing tests with or without it though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No test fails because we miss an inverted index unit test, and the assertion in the IT test is too relaxed. There's a strict assertion in a unit test, but it compares the results between the per-field format and the regular format, both of which silently skip a term state if the format is missing. Can you add an assertion at the end of these format checks to ensure we won't forget to add a new format here? I can add an inverted index unit test next week.
Yes, and we should have BWC tests for this API too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @dnhatn I pushed 120f35c .