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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Lazily load soft-deletes for searchable snapshot shards #69203
Lazily load soft-deletes for searchable snapshot shards #69203
Changes from 7 commits
8337378
f9276c7
7193b93
36e669c
44238e5
3fecbc7
8164b30
e16d36f
ba54eb3
acc363e
adf41e3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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 believe that this bit is the only reason why we need to have this class in the
oal.index
package. Can we find a way to avoid doing cross-JAR package-protected access? (Is there another option than making the CacheKey ctor public?)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.
The only other reason except for
CacheKey
is the call to thePendingSoftDeletes.applySoftDeletes
method. That method can easily be reimplemented, however. I don't see a good way to work around theCacheKey
constructor not being accessible (safe for introducing even more outrageous hacks), and FWIW we already have some classes likeShuffleForcedMergePolicy
andOneMergeHelper
in this package.