Uploaded image for project: 'Lucene - Core'
  1. Lucene - Core
  2. LUCENE-2092

BooleanQuery.hashCode and equals ignore isCoordDisabled

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 1.9, 2.0.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.4, 2.4.1, 2.9, 2.9.1
    • Fix Version/s: 2.9.2, 3.0.1, 4.0-ALPHA
    • Component/s: core/query/scoring
    • Labels:
      None
    • Lucene Fields:
      New

      Description

      BooleanQuery.isCoordDisabled() is not considered by BooleanQuery's hashCode() or equals() methods ... this can cause serious badness to happen when caching BooleanQueries.

      bug traces back to at least 1.9

      1. LUCENE-2092.patch
        3 kB
        Michael McCandless

        Activity

        Hide
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment -

        This is quite nasty. Uwe, should we re-spin 3.0 for it? Or for 3.0.1?

        Show
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment - This is quite nasty. Uwe, should we re-spin 3.0 for it? Or for 3.0.1?
        Hide
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment -

        Attached patch... the fix caused TestWildcard.testEmptyTerm to fail, so I fixed that too, and on back-compat branch.

        Show
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment - Attached patch... the fix caused TestWildcard.testEmptyTerm to fail, so I fixed that too, and on back-compat branch.
        Hide
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment -

        Fixed on trunk... I'll backport to 3.0 once Uwe opens it up...

        Show
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment - Fixed on trunk... I'll backport to 3.0 once Uwe opens it up...
        Hide
        erickoerickson Erick Erickson added a comment -

        Well, if it's been there since 1.9 and this is the first time it's been reported, it hasn't caused the world to stop yet. So I don't think it's worth the work unless we have to spin another 3.0 for additional reasons.

        Show
        erickoerickson Erick Erickson added a comment - Well, if it's been there since 1.9 and this is the first time it's been reported, it hasn't caused the world to stop yet. So I don't think it's worth the work unless we have to spin another 3.0 for additional reasons.
        Hide
        thetaphi Uwe Schindler added a comment -

        Well, if it's been there since 1.9 and this is the first time it's been reported, it hasn't caused the world to stop yet. So I don't think it's worth the work unless we have to spin another 3.0 for additional reasons.

        +1

        But you can commit to 3.0 branch and also 2.9 branch. I did'nt want to have commits in 3.0, because if I respin a release, I would not be able to only take some of the fixes into 3.0.0. That was the reason.

        For now i marked this issue as fix for 3.1, 3.0.1, 2.9.2

        Show
        thetaphi Uwe Schindler added a comment - Well, if it's been there since 1.9 and this is the first time it's been reported, it hasn't caused the world to stop yet. So I don't think it's worth the work unless we have to spin another 3.0 for additional reasons. +1 But you can commit to 3.0 branch and also 2.9 branch. I did'nt want to have commits in 3.0, because if I respin a release, I would not be able to only take some of the fixes into 3.0.0. That was the reason. For now i marked this issue as fix for 3.1, 3.0.1, 2.9.2
        Hide
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment -

        Fixed in trunk, 3.0.x branch, 2.9.x branch. Thanks Hoss!

        Show
        mikemccand Michael McCandless added a comment - Fixed in trunk, 3.0.x branch, 2.9.x branch. Thanks Hoss!

          People

          • Assignee:
            mikemccand Michael McCandless
            Reporter:
            hossman Hoss Man
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development