I'm seeing this when starting the latest RC:
2017-09-14 18:50:09.074 INFO (main) [ ] o.a.s.c.SolrXmlConfig
Loading container configuration from
/home/ec2-user/alluxio/solr-7.0.0/server/solr/solr.xml
2017-09-14 18:50:09.179 ERROR (main) [ ] o.a.s.s.SolrDispatchFilter
Could not start Solr. Check solr/home property and the logs
2017-09-14 18:50:09.202 ERROR (main) [ ] o.a.s.c.SolrCore
null:java.lang.LinkageError: loader constraint violation in interface
itable initialization: when resolving method
"org.apache.solr.metrics.MetricSuppliers$DefaultCounterSupplier.newMetric()Lcom/codahale/metrics/Metric;"
the class loader (instance of
org/eclipse/jetty/webapp/WebAppClassLoader) of the current class,
org/apache/solr/metrics/MetricSuppliers$DefaultCounterSupplier, and
the class loader (instance of
org/eclipse/jetty/start/Classpath$Loader) for interface
com/codahale/metrics/MetricRegistry$MetricSupplier have different
Class objects for the type com/codahale/metrics/Metric used in the
signature
at
org.apache.solr.metrics.MetricSuppliers.counterSupplier(MetricSuppliers.java:269)
at
org.apache.solr.metrics.SolrMetricManager.<init>(SolrMetricManager.java:119)
at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.load(CoreContainer.java:492)
at
org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.createCoreContainer(SolrDispatchFilter.java:261)
at
org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.init(SolrDispatchFilter.java:181)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.FilterHolder.initialize(FilterHolder.java:137)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.initialize(ServletHandler.java:873)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletContextHandler.startContext(ServletContextHandler.java:349)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.webapp.WebAppContext.startWebapp(WebAppContext.java:1404)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.webapp.WebAppContext.startContext(WebAppContext.java:1366)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doStart(ContextHandler.java:778)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletContextHandler.doStart(ServletContextHandler.java:262)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.webapp.WebAppContext.doStart(WebAppContext.java:520)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.component.AbstractLifeCycle.start(AbstractLifeCycle.java:68)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.bindings.StandardStarter.processBinding(StandardStarter.java:41)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.AppLifeCycle.runBindings(AppLifeCycle.java:188)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.DeploymentManager.requestAppGoal(DeploymentManager.java:499)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.DeploymentManager.addApp(DeploymentManager.java:147)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.providers.ScanningAppProvider.fileAdded(ScanningAppProvider.java:180)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.providers.WebAppProvider.fileAdded(WebAppProvider.java:458)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.providers.ScanningAppProvider$1.fileAdded(ScanningAppProvider.java:64)
at org.eclipse.jetty.util.Scanner.reportAddition(Scanner.java:610)
at org.eclipse.jetty.util.Scanner.reportDifferences(Scanner.java:529)
at org.eclipse.jetty.util.Scanner.scan(Scanner.java:392)
at org.eclipse.jetty.util.Scanner.doStart(Scanner.java:313)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.component.AbstractLifeCycle.start(AbstractLifeCycle.java:68)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.providers.ScanningAppProvider.doStart(ScanningAppProvider.java:150)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.component.AbstractLifeCycle.start(AbstractLifeCycle.java:68)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.DeploymentManager.startAppProvider(DeploymentManager.java:561)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.deploy.DeploymentManager.doStart(DeploymentManager.java:236)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.component.AbstractLifeCycle.start(AbstractLifeCycle.java:68)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.component.ContainerLifeCycle.start(ContainerLifeCycle.java:131)
at org.eclipse.jetty.server.Server.start(Server.java:422)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.component.ContainerLifeCycle.doStart(ContainerLifeCycle.java:113)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.AbstractHandler.doStart(AbstractHandler.java:61)
at org.eclipse.jetty.server.Server.doStart(Server.java:389)
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It looks like the vote passed? (hurray!)
>
> Le lun. 11 sept. 2017 à 23:07, Mike Drob <md...@apache.org> a écrit :
>>
>> SUCCESS! [1:09:28.373226]
>>
>> On Mac OS X 10.12.6 with Oracle Java 1.8.0_131 and Ant 1.10.1
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe
>> <tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>> SUCCESS! [0:44:22.517203]
>>>
>>> Thanks for working on this Anshum!
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Tommaso Teofili
>>> <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> SUCCESS! [4:47:50.042814]
>>>>
>>>> +1 for me too, then a quick bugfix release which includes also
>>>> SOLR-11348
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Il giorno lun 11 set 2017 alle ore 19:08 Anshum Gupta
>>>> <ansh...@apple.com> ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>> I have the same opinion. I’ll let this vote run :)
>>>>>
>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My opinion: Let’s get 7.0 out ASAP. I don’t think the DIH db example
>>>>> problem should be a blocker.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Steve
>>>>> www.lucidworks.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for bringing this up and testing the RC out :). I am on the same
>>>>> page as Adrien, about the release being stuck, but having said I think
>>>>> that
>>>>> it's been in that position for good.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as respiring the RC goes, I am happy to do that but if this is
>>>>> just a DIH 'example' issue, and as much as I'd want a completely fixed RC,
>>>>> we might still be ok moving ahead.
>>>>>
>>>>> If others feel that we should respin, I think we should merge in
>>>>> changes from 7x into 7.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 11, 2017, at 6:00 AM, Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 SUCCESS! [2:06:13.881329]
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the broken dih example and whether we should respin, we have
>>>>> been trying to release 7.0.0 for more than two months and we already
>>>>> accumulated more than enough good changes to release 7.1.0. I'm worried
>>>>> about letting 7.0 slip for another couple weeks. So if we decide to cancel
>>>>> this vote, I think we should also consider merging branch_7x into
>>>>> branch_7_0
>>>>> and restarting the release process from scratch. My preference is still to
>>>>> release 7.0 from branch_7_0 as soon as possible and start working on 7.1
>>>>> in
>>>>> the coming weeks, but then we might need to increase the bug severity that
>>>>> is required to warrant a respin.
>>>>>
>>>>> Le lun. 11 sept. 2017 à 12:52, Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@gmail.com> a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>> SUCCESS! [0:56:11.512628]
>>>>>
>>>>> +1.
>>>>>
>>>>> D.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Christine
>>>>>
>>>>> The WARN msgs are not blockers.
>>>>> However, I tested the DIH ‘db’ example with 6.6.0 and it works,
>>>>> indexing 16
>>>>> documents.
>>>>> Also re-tested the example directly in branch_7_0 and it fails there
>>>>> too, so
>>>>> this seems to be a regression, but I don’t know what the bug is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11348 as a blocker
>>>>> for
>>>>> this, leaving it up to RM to lower the severity if the vote passes.
>>>>>
>>>>> -0
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>>>>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>>>>>
>>>>> 11. sep. 2017 kl. 04.53 skrev Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
>>>>> <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Jan for these observations!
>>>>>
>>>>> The Couldn't add files WARNing seems be pre-existing and I've created
>>>>> SOLR-11346 to explore if actually it should be an ERROR/exception.
>>>>>
>>>>> About the solr.LatLonType WARNing, does the DIH example actually use
>>>>> those
>>>>> field types? If not could they simply be removed instead of replaced,
>>>>> unless
>>>>> perhaps we wish to keep all the example configs similar as much as
>>>>> possible
>>>>> even if that means that some examples will have unused stuff?
>>>>>
>>>>> Those are my observations i.e. also not a vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Christine
>>>>>
>>>>> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/10/17 22:19:11
>>>>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Lucene/Solr 7.0.0 RC3
>>>>>
>>>>> DIH example that failed in RC2 now loads, but still with three WARN
>>>>> level
>>>>> logs which is not ideal from a fresh install...
>>>>>
>>>>> WARN - 2017-09-10 20:44:02.927; [ x:mail]
>>>>> org.apache.solr.core.SolrConfig; Couldn't add files from
>>>>> /Users/janhoy/Downloads/solr-7.0.0/contrib/dataimporthandler/lib
>>>>> filtered by
>>>>> .*\.jar to classpath:
>>>>> /Users/janhoy/Downloads/solr-7.0.0/contrib/dataimporthandler/lib
>>>>> WARN - 2017-09-10 20:44:03.454; [ x:db]
>>>>> org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader; Solr loaded a deprecated
>>>>> plugin/analysis class [solr.LatLonType]. Please consult documentation
>>>>> how to
>>>>> replace it accordingly.
>>>>> WARN - 2017-09-10 20:44:03.454; [ x:mail]
>>>>> org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader; Solr loaded a deprecated
>>>>> plugin/analysis class [solr.LatLonType]. Please consult documentation
>>>>> how to
>>>>> replace it accordingly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> However, DIH “db” example does not work ootb. But it could have been
>>>>> broken
>>>>> in earlier versions too?
>>>>>
>>>>> ERROR - 2017-09-10 20:46:29.317; [ x:db]
>>>>> org.apache.solr.common.SolrException; Exception while processing: item
>>>>> document : SolrInputDocument(fields:
>>>>> []):org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException:
>>>>> Unable to
>>>>> execute query: select * from item Processing Document # 1
>>>>> at
>>>>>
>>>>> org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException.wrapAndThrow(DataImportHandlerException.java:69)
>>>>> …
>>>>> Caused by: java.sql.SQLException: error in script file line: 2
>>>>> /Users/janhoy/Downloads/solr-7.0.0/example/example-DIH/hsqldb/ex system
>>>>> object cannot be modified in statement [CREATE CACHED TABLE ITEM(ID
>>>>> CHAR(8),NAME VARCHAR(100),MANU VARCHAR(50),WEIGHT REAL,PRICE
>>>>> REAL,POPULARITY
>>>>> INTEGER,INCLUDES VARCHAR(200),LAST_MODIFIED TIMESTAMP DEFAULT NOW)]
>>>>> at org.hsqldb.jdbc.JDBCUtil.sqlException(Unknown Source)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The “files” example that failed in RC2 now works.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is not a vote, just an observation :) Will run smoke tester later.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
>>>>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>>>>>
>>>>> 9. sep. 2017 kl. 07.10 skrev Anshum Gupta <ansh...@apple.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote for the third release candidate for Apache Lucene/Solr
>>>>> 7.0.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-7.0.0-RC3-rev3ba304b29825a94249c5145b3f5061e87b87d8f8/
>>>>>
>>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly from this command:
>>>>>
>>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-7.0.0-RC3-rev3ba304b29825a94249c5145b3f5061e87b87d8f8/
>>>>>
>>>>> Reminder: You would need to run this from branch_7_0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's my +1:
>>>>>
>>>>> SUCCESS! [0:35:25.819530]
>>>>>
>>>>> -Anshum
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
