Skip to content
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

Update bytebuffer-collections to 0.2.5 #3117

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2016

Conversation

drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor

  • Adds polygound bound for spatial data. Thanks @scusjs
  • Fixes cache key collisions for spatial data
  • Update roaring to 0.5.18

@drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor Author

lol, those labels were not at all what I had put on there originally. Github, you are silly

@gianm
Copy link
Contributor

gianm commented Jun 8, 2016

@drcrallen I had a similar thing happen to me earlier today and thought I was just losing my mind

@gianm
Copy link
Contributor

gianm commented Jun 8, 2016

👍

@gianm
Copy link
Contributor

gianm commented Jun 8, 2016

BTW: Why not a newer roaring? Looks like there are newer 0.5.x's, and also 0.6.x's are a thing.

https://github.com/RoaringBitmap/RoaringBitmap/blob/master/CHANGELOG

@drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gianm because noone submitted a thing to bytebuffer-collections

@drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't know what the compatibility between 0.5.x and 0.6.x is. Maybe @lemire can comment if there would be any unexpected things happen to things created with 0.5.x roaring if we updated to 0.6.x?

@drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor Author

Filed metamx/bytebuffer-collections#35

@lemire
Copy link

lemire commented Jun 8, 2016

@drcrallen

The API and the file format should be considered stable. We are mostly just optimizing performance, reducing memory usage and adding (small) features. Upgrading to the latest version should not be an issue and you should expect performance and memory-usage gains.

If any issue should arise (unlikely), we are there to help.

It is recommended to update to version 0.6 of RoaringBitmap except if you need Java 6 support. We deliberately stopped testing Java 6 with version 0.6. But if anyone is using Druid with Java 6, they have other problems, presumably...

@drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor Author

But if anyone is using Druid with Java 6, they have other problems, presumably...

Yes, like "rejected jars" kind of problems. Thanks!

@drcrallen
Copy link
Contributor Author

Tests run: 24, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 37.007 sec <<< FAILURE! - in io.druid.indexing.overlord.TaskLifecycleTest
testResumeTasks[taskStorageType=HeapMemoryTaskStorage](io.druid.indexing.overlord.TaskLifecycleTest)  Time elapsed: 14.16 sec  <<< ERROR!
com.metamx.common.ISE: Where did the task go?!: index_foo_2016-06-08T20:25:54.232Z
    at io.druid.indexing.overlord.TaskLifecycleTest.testResumeTasks(TaskLifecycleTest.java:1070)

@drcrallen drcrallen closed this Jun 8, 2016
@drcrallen drcrallen reopened this Jun 8, 2016
@drcrallen drcrallen closed this Jun 9, 2016
@drcrallen drcrallen reopened this Jun 9, 2016
@nishantmonu51
Copy link
Member

👍

@drcrallen drcrallen merged commit aa2982e into apache:master Jun 13, 2016
@drcrallen drcrallen deleted the updateByteBufferCollections branch June 13, 2016 15:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants