lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Laimonas Simutis <lai...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Core tests
Date Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:21:21 GMT
Itamar,

OrderedDictionary does look like it would do the trick! I will check it
out. We should be good without System.Web reference, as that one comes into
play only if we were to use a subclass of it, AdapterDictionary that is in
the web namespace.


Laimonas

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>
wrote:

> There's this:
>
> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.collections.specialized.ordereddictionary(v=vs.110).aspx
> but I'm not sure we want a reference to System.Web
>
> I assume we will have to bring in a parallel implementation, now question
> is which
>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/754233/is-it-there-any-lru-implementation-of-idictionary/3719378#3719378
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/487006/135701
>
> --
>
> Itamar Syn-Hershko
> http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> Freelance Developer & Consultant
> Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Laimonas Simutis <laimis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am looking currently at the failures in
> > Lucene.Net.Index.TestBinaryDocValuesUpdates and found the culprits. The
> > offending class is this one:
> >
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/blob/master/src/Lucene.Net.Core/Index/BufferedUpdates.cs
> >
> > First fix is easy, remove the ; that got in there by mistake on line 285.
> > The second issue is that in Lucene this class is using LinkedHashMap
> > structure. During the port, a HashMap was used instead which breaks
> certain
> > behaviors. Key feature of the LinkedHashMap that Lucene is relying on
> > appears to be the fact that the order of insertions is reflected in the
> > iteration of the values. You can see the failure if you run
> > the TestUpdatesOrder class.
> >
> > Has anyone dealt with LinkedHashMap before in .NET? Any implementation
> > suggestions / pointers?
> >
> > Due to the nature of this bug, it might be affecting more than just the
> > tests in BinaryDocValuesUpdates.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I just fixed a couple more
> > >
> > > The Index namespace has some concurrency issues, but also many failures
> > > which relate to the Store ones.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> > >
> > > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Laimonas Simutis <laimis@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > With yesterday's PR which contains more merge related fixes,
> > > > https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/66, we are reaching the
> > > milestone
> > > > of only 100 failing tests in core! Woot woot! (TC is showing 98,
> > locally
> > > I
> > > > get ~104).
> > > >
> > > > From Codec tests in current core, Lucene40 still has 4 failures, so
> > going
> > > > after them next and then looking into Lucene.Net.Index test
> namespace.
> > > > Heads up in case anyone else is working on the tests there.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Laimonas
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message