This is really frustrating. We have a feature that never should have been committed. The behavior and documentation don’t match and the inputs are limited to values that make it unusable. The documentation contains a nonfunctional link.
I contribute a patch that implements both the original behavior and the documented behavior, with unit tests and detailed documentation. What else am I supposed to do? This seems like we’ve lost the spirit of Yonik’s Law of Patches and perfection has become the enemy of progress. wunder Walter Underwood wun...@wunderwood.org http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > On Jun 1, 2021, at 2:01 PM, David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 to Jan's comment; no need to hold up the release. > > I also think we should be open to more releases in the future for 8.x. > > ~ David Smiley > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> > > On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 4:55 PM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com > <mailto:jan....@cominvent.com>> wrote: > Let's not hold up the release due to this incomplete PR. It obviously needs > more time for completion and there is always a new train to catch. > As far as I understand, Circuit breakers are pluggable, so anyone can > configure their own implementation in the meantime? > > Jan > >> 1. jun. 2021 kl. 22:13 skrev Atri Sharma <a...@apache.org >> <mailto:a...@apache.org>>: >> >> I appreciate you fixing this and adding the new circuit breaker and look >> forward to having it in the hands of our users soon. >> >> However, the current state of PR, with significant API churn for a single >> change and overlapping code is not yet ready. >> >> If this is too much of a rework, I am happy to take the existing PR and do >> the changes, post which I believe the PR should be close to completion. >> >> Let me know if you need me to help, but unfortunately, the two objections I >> raised are blockers, atleast until we establish that they cannot be done >> away with. >> >> >> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021, 01:37 Walter Underwood, <wun...@wunderwood.org >> <mailto:wun...@wunderwood.org>> wrote: >> I would appreciate a second opinion on the pull request. Substantive issues >> have been resolved. At this point, the discussion is about code style and >> coding standards. I don’t have detailed knowledge about the Solr coding >> style, so I’d appreciate another set of eyes. >> >> The current behavior is buggy, and we are not able to use it at Chegg. The >> patch fixes those bugs. >> >> https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/96 >> <https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/96> >> >> wunder >> Walter Underwood >> wun...@wunderwood.org <mailto:wun...@wunderwood.org> >> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ <http://observer.wunderwood.org/> (my blog) >> >>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 12:27 PM, Walter Underwood <wun...@wunderwood.org >>> <mailto:wun...@wunderwood.org>> wrote: >>> >>> I answered the comments. I don’t see those answers on github, oddly. >>> >>> I’ll re-answer them. Most of your questions are already answered in the >>> discussion on Jira. >>> >>> I central issues is that load average is not always a CPU measure. In some >>> systems, it includes threads in iowait. So it is potentially misleading to >>> label it as CPU and document it as CPU. The updated documentation makes >>> that clear, so that should have already answered your comment. that is why >>> it is important to rename the existing circuit breaker. >>> >>> wunder >>> Walter Underwood >>> wun...@wunderwood.org <mailto:wun...@wunderwood.org> >>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ <http://observer.wunderwood.org/> (my blog) >>> >>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 12:20 PM, Atri Sharma <a...@apache.org >>>> <mailto:a...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I tool a look at the PR and gave comments for SOLR-15056, and the last I >>>> checked, my comments were not addressed? >>>> >>>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021, 00:31 Walter Underwood, <wun...@wunderwood.org >>>> <mailto:wun...@wunderwood.org>> wrote: >>>> Could someone else please take a look at SOLR-15056? This is a small blast >>>> radius change that improves the circuit breakers. It includes unit tests >>>> and documentation and has been ready since January. >>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/96/files >>>> <https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/96/files> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15056 >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15056> >>>> >>>> wunder >>>> Walter Underwood >>>> wun...@wunderwood.org <mailto:wun...@wunderwood.org> >>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ <http://observer.wunderwood.org/> (my >>>> blog) >>>> >>>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 11:53 AM, Mayya Sharipova >>>>> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.INVALID >>>>> <mailto:mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.INVALID>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for the update, Houston. >>>>> >>>>> I've started the release process, the branch 8.9 is now cut. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 11:21 AM Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org >>>>> <mailto:hous...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>> Mayya, SOLR-14978 is now in 8.x. So no longer a blocker. >>>>> >>>>> - Houston >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:42 PM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org >>>>> <mailto:dsmi...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>> SOLR-15412 is rather serious as the title suggests. I haven't been >>>>> tracking the progress so if it's already resolved, that's unknown to me >>>>> and isn't reflected in JIRA. >>>>> >>>>> ~ David Smiley >>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 5:24 PM Mayya Sharipova >>>>> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.invalid >>>>> <mailto:mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.invalid>> wrote: >>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>> I wonder if everyone is ok for May 31st (Monday) as the date for the >>>>> feature freeze date and branch cut? >>>>> I've noticed that `releaseWizard.py` is also asking for the length of >>>>> feature freeze. What is the custom length to put there? >>>>> >>>>> Looks like Lucene >>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LUCENE/versions/12349562> >>>>> doesn't have any unresolved issues for 8.9. >>>>> SOLR <https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12349563> has: >>>>> - SOLR-15412 Strict validation on Replica metadata can cause complete >>>>> outage (Looks like it may be resolved already?) >>>>> - SOLR-15410 GC log is directed to console when starting Solr with Java >>>>> 11 Open J9 on Windows >>>>> - SOLR-15056 CPU circuit breaker needs to use CPU utilization, not Unix >>>>> load average >>>>> >>>>> Are we ok to postpone these issues to later releases if they are not >>>>> resolved and merged before feature freeze? >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:41 PM Colvin Cowie <colvin.cowie....@gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:colvin.cowie....@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> Eric was going to have a look at the PR. >>>>> But if it isn't done in time then I don't think it needs to block the >>>>> release >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 15:50, Mayya Sharipova >>>>> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.invalid >>>>> <mailto:mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.invalid>> wrote: >>>>> Hello Colvin, >>>>> I am wondering if you still want to merge SOLR-15410 for the Lucene/Solr >>>>> 8.9 release? >>>>> Should we have a deadline for feature freeze? Say May 30th (Sunday)? >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 8:49 AM Noble Paul <noble.p...@gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:noble.p...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 9:30 PM Colvin Cowie <colvin.cowie....@gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:colvin.cowie....@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Hello, >>>>> > >>>>> > I raised SOLR-15410 yesterday with a PR to fix an issue with GC logging >>>>> > when using new versions of OpenJ9. It's small, so if somebody could >>>>> > have a look at it in time for 8.9 that would be great >>>>> > >>>>> > Thanks, >>>>> > Colvin >>>>> > >>>>> > On Thu, 13 May 2021 at 17:52, Nhat Nguyen <nhat.ngu...@elastic.co >>>>> > <mailto:nhat.ngu...@elastic.co>.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Hi Mayya, >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I would like to backport LUCENE-9935, which enables bulk-merge for >>>>> >> stored fields with index sort, to 8.x this weekend. The patch is >>>>> >> ready, but we prefer to give CI some cycles before backporting. Please >>>>> >> let me know if it's okay with the release plan. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Thanks, >>>>> >> Nhat >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:44 PM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com >>>>> >> <mailto:gus.h...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Perhaps https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15378 >>>>> >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15378> should be >>>>> >>> investigated before 8.9, maybe make it a blocker? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 1:35 AM Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com >>>>> >>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Mayya, I created backport for Adrien's issue here, to try to help >>>>> >>>> out: >>>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2495 >>>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2495> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Personally, I felt that merging non-trivial changes from main branch >>>>> >>>> to 8.x has some additional risks when cherry-picking: >>>>> >>>> * structural changes in main branch making merging more difficult >>>>> >>>> (e.g. LUCENE-9705 reorganization of codec versioning, great change >>>>> >>>> moving forwards though) >>>>> >>>> * there are many style changes due to spotless in main branch which >>>>> >>>> add noise to merging against old code. >>>>> >>>> * In the specific case of LUCENE-9827, the usual additional tricky >>>>> >>>> backwards compatibility for 8.x must be added in the backport (due to >>>>> >>>> minor version bumps there) which can go wrong. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I still think that particular change is worth considering for 8.9, it >>>>> >>>> isn't just a performance bug but also a huge improvement to test >>>>> >>>> coverage that helps combat risks. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> But we should still take some precautions when releasing an 8.x IMO: >>>>> >>>> * be mindful of what we are backporting and the risks involved: it >>>>> >>>> is harder. >>>>> >>>> * try to let jenkins bake changes in 8.x branches for longer than >>>>> >>>> usual? even a few days really helps. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 1:29 PM Mayya Sharipova >>>>> >>>> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co >>>>> >>>> <mailto:mayya.sharip...@elastic.co>.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > Thanks everyone, >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > Adrien, I am happy to try to be a release manager for this >>>>> >>>> > release. >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > Adrien, and Gus, please let me know when your changes are merged >>>>> >>>> > to 8.x >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:38 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>> > <mailto:gus.h...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >> >>>>> >>>> >> I'm also looking to find time to get >>>>> >>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14597 >>>>> >>>> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14597> into some sort >>>>> >>>> >> of 8x. I've recently completed the back port of 2/3 of the lucene >>>>> >>>> >> tickets that are related, and hope to work on the third >>>>> >>>> >> tomorrow.... >>>>> >>>> >> >>>>> >>>> >> I had some feedback there, but I think folks were waiting for the >>>>> >>>> >> version integrated with the final form of the Lucene tickets >>>>> >>>> >> before delving further. Hopefully this week I can start on a >>>>> >>>> >> patch that does that. >>>>> >>>> >> >>>>> >>>> >> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:25 AM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>> >> <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>> I would like to backport LUCENE-9827 before we release 8.9, a >>>>> >>>> >>> performance regression to stored fields merges. I'll work on >>>>> >>>> >>> this as soon as possible. >>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 10:28 PM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>> >>> <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> +1 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Mayya, are you volunteering to be the release manager? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 18:06, Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>>>> >>>> >>>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com <mailto:ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> a écrit : >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 7:50 PM Mayya Sharipova >>>>> >>>> >>>>> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co >>>>> >>>> >>>>> <mailto:mayya.sharip...@elastic.co>.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> I was wondering if we can have a 8.9.0 release. It has been >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> more than 3 months since 8.8.0 was released. >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> 8.9.0 doesn't need to be the last release in the 8.x series. >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>>>> >>>> >>> Adrien >>>>> >>>> >> >>>>> >>>> >> >>>>> >>>> >> >>>>> >>>> >> -- >>>>> >>>> >> http://www.needhamsoftware.com <http://www.needhamsoftware.com/> >>>>> >>>> >> (work) >>>>> >>>> >> http://www.the111shift.com <http://www.the111shift.com/> (play) >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>>> >>>> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> >>>>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>>>> >>>> <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> -- >>>>> >>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com <http://www.needhamsoftware.com/> >>>>> >>> (work) >>>>> >>> http://www.the111shift.com <http://www.the111shift.com/> (play) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Noble Paul >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>>> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>>>> <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
