SOLR-15316 / PR 2502 is now merged to branch_8_9

Jan

> 3. jun. 2021 kl. 20:53 skrev Mayya Sharipova 
> <[email protected]>:
> 
> I can wait till this PR 2502 is backported (hopefully by tomorrow? and 
> hopefully will be the last item to wait for).
> And tomorrow I will try to build a RC.
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 8:57 AM Cassandra Targett <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> It’s OK with me, but I’m not really in a position to understand the changes 
> and/or test it. And while we have a branch, I’m not clear on when the first 
> RC is planned, so Mayya should weigh in I think.
> 
> Cassandra
> On Jun 3, 2021, 5:49 AM -0500, Jan Høydahl <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>, wrote:
>> Mayya, Cassandra, I'd like to merge the Jetty upgrade, SOLR-15316 to 
>> branch_8x and branch_8_9. See backport PR 
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2502 
>> <https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2502>
>> Is that ok?
>> 
>> Jan
>> 
>>> 2. jun. 2021 kl. 01:00 skrev Jan Høydahl <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>>> 
>>> Cassandra,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for spotting the Jetty JIRA (SOLR-15316 
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15316>). I put up a quck PR 
>>> <https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/157> for upgrading Jetty to 
>>> 9.4.41.v20210516. Currently running all tests.
>>> Due to the CVEs I think there should not be a new Solr release without this 
>>> upgrade. I set fixVersion to 8.9 and kept the blocker. If anyone disagrees, 
>>> speak out.
>>> 
>>> There's always a risk of a new Jetty version introducing new bugs, but this 
>>> is a minor version upgrade with (almost) exclusively bug fixes since 
>>> 9.4.36, so I'm willing to take the risk if tests look good. Perhaps Jenkins 
>>> gets a few test spins on main before the 8.9 release too. Whyt Mayya?
>>> 
>>> Jan
>>> 
>>>> 1. jun. 2021 kl. 23:04 skrev Cassandra Targett <[email protected] 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>>>> 
>>>> I got a question this morning about some Jetty CVEs that look to be fixed 
>>>> with Jetty 9.4.39, and there’s an issue marked as a Blocker (with no 
>>>> version) to upgrade to that version. Is there time to do that for 8.9? Or 
>>>> is it too high risk or would take too long? 
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15316 
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15316>
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry, I’m way behind on mailing lists and didn’t see the branch had been 
>>>> cut already!
>>>> 
>>>> Cassandra
>>>> On Jun 1, 2021, 3:54 PM -0500, Jan Høydahl <[email protected] 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>, 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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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, <[email protected] 
>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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
>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ <http://observer.wunderwood.org/>  (my 
>>>>>> blog)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 12:27 PM, Walter Underwood <[email protected] 
>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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
>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ <http://observer.wunderwood.org/>  (my 
>>>>>>> blog)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 12:20 PM, Atri Sharma <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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, <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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
>>>>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ <http://observer.wunderwood.org/>  (my 
>>>>>>>> blog)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 11:53 AM, Mayya Sharipova 
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
>>>>>>>>> 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 
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 9:30 PM Colvin Cowie 
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
>>>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>.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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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
>>>>>>>>> >>>> <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>.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 <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> +1
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> Mayya, are you volunteering to be the release manager?
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 18:06, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 7:50 PM Mayya Sharipova 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> <[email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>.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: [email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>> >>> --
>>>>>>>>> >>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com <http://www.needhamsoftware.com/> 
>>>>>>>>> >>> (work)
>>>>>>>>> >>> http://www.the111shift.com <http://www.the111shift.com/> (play)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> Noble Paul
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to