Just an update here ... I'm still trying to get an RC built but the test suite continues to fail with flaky tests, this past run it was: org.apache.solr.util.TestCircuitBreaker.testResponseWithCBTiming, which doesn't look like it fails all that much, see: http://fucit.org/solr-jenkins-reports/history-trend-of-recent-failures.html#series/org.apache.solr.util.TestCircuitBreaker.testResponseWithCBTiming
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 3:14 PM Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: > > That was a bad backport from main, and I was mainly paying attention to the > main jenkins tests. Apologies about that oversight. Please see PR > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2578 > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 2:21 PM Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This test also fails on Jenkins all the time. In all branches and on all >> platforms. All the time, it's definitely a regression. >> >> Uwe >> >> Am 20. September 2021 19:13:56 UTC schrieb Timothy Potter >> <thelabd...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> Started building the RC1 again today and the smoke tester failed. The >>> culprit was: org.apache.solr.search.TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering >>> >>> Re-ran that test from the RC checkout and it failed again: >>> >>> [junit4] 2> 5490 ERROR >>> (TEST-TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering-seed#[9A85A1D74D8AACF9]) [ >>> ] o.a.s.SolrTestCaseJ4 REQUEST FAILED: >>> facet.query=*:*&facet.query={!key%3DmultiSelect+ex%3Dt}*:*&facet.query={!key%3DfacetQuery+cache%3Dfalse}+val_i:2+val_i:4&q={!+cost%3D7+tag%3Dt}-_query_:"{!frange+v%3Dval_i+l%3D2+u%3D5}"&facet=true&wt=xml >>> [junit4] 2> 5491 INFO >>> (TEST-TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering-seed#[9A85A1D74D8AACF9]) [ >>> ] o.a.s.SolrTestCaseJ4 ###Ending testRandomFiltering >>> [junit4] 2> NOTE: reproduce with: ant test >>> -Dtestcase=TestFiltering -Dtests.method=testRandomFiltering >>> -Dtests.seed=9A85A1D74D8AACF9 -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.badapples=true >>> -Dtests.locale=mgh -Dtests.timezone=Iceland -Dtests.asserts=true >>> -Dtests.file.encoding=US-ASCII >>> [junit4] FAILURE 0.82s | TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering <<< >>> [junit4] > Throwable #1: java.lang.AssertionError: should have >>> unwrapped >>> [junit4] > at >>> __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([9A85A1D74D8AACF9:85E60212A8ADECF0]:0) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getAndCacheDocSet(SolrIndexSearcher.java:862) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getDocSet(SolrIndexSearcher.java:824) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getDocListC(SolrIndexSearcher.java:1367) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.search(SolrIndexSearcher.java:596) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.doProcessUngroupedSearch(QueryComponent.java:1511) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.process(QueryComponent.java:390) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.handler.component.SearchHandler.handleRequestBody(SearchHandler.java:368) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.handler.RequestHandlerBase.handleRequest(RequestHandlerBase.java:216) >>> [junit4] > at >>> org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.execute(SolrCore.java:2637) >>> >>> Looking at the stats for this test, it seems like it started failing >>> more consistently over the past week or so: >>> http://fucit.org/solr-jenkins-reports/history-trend-of-recent-failures.html#series/org.apache.solr.search.TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering >>> >>> I beasted it and 3/10 failed: >>> >>> [beaster] Tests with failures [seed: A5F8AAEF7994FE2B] (first 3 out of >>> 10): >>> [beaster] - org.apache.solr.search.TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering >>> [beaster] - org.apache.solr.search.TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering >>> [beaster] - org.apache.solr.search.TestFiltering.testRandomFiltering >>> >>> I could just mark it as a BadApple and move on, but wanted to see if >>> anyone had any ideas about this test flakiness? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Tim >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 4:06 PM Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Can we move discussion about the implementation to the JIRA issue or the >>>> PR? >>>> >>>> I'm not a lawyer, so not playing with the GPL fire is the easiest way for >>>> me to avoid getting burned. The regex I have is pretty straightforward, I >>>> do not feel like it is a great cause for alarm. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 4:18 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Given that we don't ship the code or binaries that involve that python >>>>> library, do we need to care about the license? I'm skeptical of hand >>>>> rolled regex and would rather favour either of the libraries Jan >>>>> mentioned. Just my two cents. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, 18 Sep, 2021, 12:02 am Mike Drob, <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The second library you linked, Jan, is AGPL. Thank you for continuing >>>>>> to look for alternatives. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have some regular expressions cooked up locally that I think will let >>>>>> us read the split lines going forward, and will put up the patch shortly. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 7:45 AM Yuval Paz <yuval.p...@mail.huji.ac.il> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not sure if this is something can be changed easily, but if the >>>>>>> problem is caused by some parsers don't know how to parse line wrapping >>>>>>> in the middle of the Hash why not moving the hash completely to the new >>>>>>> line (the specification allow new line at any point in the value)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The commit hash + date comes out to be exactly 71 bytes (including the >>>>>>> space at the start), and it should be a constant size, and by the time >>>>>>> the version will reach 48 bytes we all be probably dead >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021, 2:47 PM Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sure, but that package is archived/read-only, GPLv3. with 3 watchers >>>>>>>> and 1 star. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 4:27 AM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Let's just follow the spec and move on. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just tested this python package, which has no problem parsing the >>>>>>>>> problematic manifest https://pypi.org/project/jarmanifest/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> manifest.getAttributes("/tmp/lucene-manifest.mf") >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [{'implementationversion': '9.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>>>>>>>> de45b68c909815ce5ea7b6b9e1a2ce3375b6334d [snapshot build, details >>>>>>>>> omitted]'}] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 17. sep. 2021 kl. 09:32 skrev Dawid Weiss <dawid.we...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We could do a few things to keep everyone happy - >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 1) keep abbreviated hash in the Implementat-Version and use a >>>>>>>>> separate manifest entry to store a full hash. >>>>>>>>> 2) use a longer version for git show (abbrev=num) so that the chance >>>>>>>>> of collisions in the future is minimized. It's still not a full hash >>>>>>>>> but a >>>>>>>>> long(er) forced prefix. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> D. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:21 AM Chris Hostetter >>>>>>>>> <hossman_luc...@fucit.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : I was referring to doing this with languages other than java. >>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>> : I'm also assuming that exceeding this limit is going to cause >>>>>>>>>> indirect >>>>>>>>>> : hassles for users of lucene, e.g. breaking various security / >>>>>>>>>> supply >>>>>>>>>> : chain tools. We know a lot of these are total crap but people in >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> : corporate world have to suffer under them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just to be clear -- our 'Implementation-Version:' has been >>>>>>>>>> exceeding the >>>>>>>>>> 72 byte "single line" limit for a LOOOOONG time -- worrying about >>>>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>>>> "security / supply chain" tools will handle parsing that line now >>>>>>>>>> seems >>>>>>>>>> kind of silly... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If tools can't handle a line wrap in the 8.10 jars, then they >>>>>>>>>> haven't >>>>>>>>>> been able to handle the line wrap since we switched from svn to git >>>>>>>>>> (when >>>>>>>>>> the Implementation Version values switched from being based svn >>>>>>>>>> version# >>>>>>>>>> to git sha) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The *ONLY* thing that's new here is where in the value the line wrap >>>>>>>>>> happens (with 8.10.0 it happens in the middle of the SHA) and that >>>>>>>>>> our >>>>>>>>>> smoketest tool isn't smart enough to parse the values properly. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is not even the first time we've even had a conversation about >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> smoke tester and Implementation Version line wraps: LUCENE-7023. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : Its super-easy to use a short hash here and avoid problems. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is however an actual and practical downside to switching our >>>>>>>>>> implementation version to using a "short" SHA, and that's that we >>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>> lose the ability to garuntee that the information in the >>>>>>>>>> Implementation-Version uniquely identifies what commit a given jar >>>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>>> built from. Multiple commits with the same short(end) hash are >>>>>>>>>> possible >>>>>>>>>> -- Multiple commits with identical (full) commits is not. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Folks may think that using git tags is useful enough for figuring >>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>> out from official releases, but being able to look at the jar >>>>>>>>>> metadata >>>>>>>>>> from arbitrary builds off of arbitrary branches and sanity check >>>>>>>>>> where >>>>>>>>>> exactly they come from has been very useful to me for 10+ years. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:03 AM Dawid Weiss >>>>>>>>>> <dawid.we...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > Jar command doesn't have it, true. But it's fairly trivial to >>>>>>>>>> do, even >>>>>>>>>> : > with an inline snippet like this one? >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > public class PrintManifest { >>>>>>>>>> : > public static void main(String[] jars) throws IOException { >>>>>>>>>> : > for (var jar : jars) { >>>>>>>>>> : > var manifest = new >>>>>>>>>> JarFile(Paths.get(jar).toFile()).getManifest(); >>>>>>>>>> : > var attrs = manifest.getMainAttributes(); >>>>>>>>>> : > System.out.println(jar + ": " + >>>>>>>>>> attrs.getValue("Implementation-Version")); >>>>>>>>>> : > } >>>>>>>>>> : > } >>>>>>>>>> : > } >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > I have this in my lucene-core-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar: >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > Implementation-Version: 9.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>>>>>>>>> de45b68c909815ce5ea7b6b9e1a2ce337 >>>>>>>>>> : > 5b6334d [snapshot build, details omitted] >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > and running: >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > java PrintManifest.java lucene-core-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > shows: >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > lucene-core-9.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar: 9.0.0-SNAPSHOT >>>>>>>>>> : > de45b68c909815ce5ea7b6b9e1a2ce3375b6334d [snapshot build, >>>>>>>>>> details >>>>>>>>>> : > omitted] >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > This seems easier to me than trying to remember and keep the >>>>>>>>>> length of >>>>>>>>>> : > that line shorter than an arbitrary limit. >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > Dawid >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>> : > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 9:46 PM Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > But its irrelevant that is "valid" when virtually no tools >>>>>>>>>> match it. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > In other words, I'd agree with you if the "jar" command had >>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>> : > > ability to read these manifests and print stuff to stdout, >>>>>>>>>> e.g. if >>>>>>>>>> : > > there was ANY interop at all here. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > But there isn't. So IMO it makes no sense to cause confusion >>>>>>>>>> and chaos >>>>>>>>>> : > > by adding an unnecessarily long git commit hash. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 3:26 PM Dawid Weiss >>>>>>>>>> <dawid.we...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > > This is valid manifest line-breaking though... Can we read >>>>>>>>>> the manifest properly on the smoke tester side somehow (for example, >>>>>>>>>> run a Java process that reads and extracts the required attribute)? >>>>>>>>>> This way we wouldn't care about the implementation details of how >>>>>>>>>> manifest wraps the lines (or escapes characters). >>>>>>>>>> : > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > > D. >>>>>>>>>> : > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 8:46 PM Mike Drob <md...@mdrob.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> The benchmark jar has the info we need… sort of. When I >>>>>>>>>> built it, it has: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >>>>>>>>>> 75a5061d3715cc5d93c4cbe4f1fa62bf035eea1 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> 1 - mdrob - 2021-09-15 11:40:36 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> and it’s looking for Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >>>>>>>>>> 75a5061d3715cc5d93c4cbe4f1fa62bf035eea11 on one line. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> Because 8.10 is a character longer than 8.9, we happen to >>>>>>>>>> wrap the last character of the git commit sha. From the manifest >>>>>>>>>> spec: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> No line may be longer than 72 bytes (not characters), in >>>>>>>>>> its UTF8-encoded form. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> If a value would make the initial line longer than this, >>>>>>>>>> it should be continued >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> on extra lines (each starting with a single SPACE). >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> And we were already teetering on the edge of that limit. >>>>>>>>>> We'll run into this problem again in a few years when we try to >>>>>>>>>> release version 10.0.0, so solving it now has practical benefits >>>>>>>>>> down the line. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> There's a few options that I can come up with - >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> 1. Use the short-hash when we generate the jar >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> 2. Use the short-hash when we check the contents in the >>>>>>>>>> smoke test >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> 3. Do some line join magic in the smoke test. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> I'm leaning towards number 1 as I feel that would still be >>>>>>>>>> unique enough for our needs, but would like to hear from others as >>>>>>>>>> well. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 9:46 AM Timothy potter >>>>>>>>>> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> can someone also please look into that benchmark jar >>>>>>>>>> issue? >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> On Sep 15, 2021, at 9:44 AM, Nhat Nguyen >>>>>>>>>> <nhat.ngu...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> Thanks Mayya and Mike! I will backport it to the 8.10 >>>>>>>>>> branch. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 10:12 AM Mike Drob >>>>>>>>>> <md...@mdrob.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>> I think since Tim is out on vacation, it's probably not >>>>>>>>>> too late. That looks like a good fix to have, do we know how long >>>>>>>>>> the bug has been present? >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 7:56 AM Mayya Sharipova >>>>>>>>>> <mayya.sharip...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>> We have discovered a bug and fixed a bug in Lucene sort >>>>>>>>>> optimization (LUCENE-10106) and would like to merge it to Lucene >>>>>>>>>> 8.10 if it is not too late. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>> I apologize for the inconvenience, the bug was >>>>>>>>>> discovered just yesterday. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 9:26 PM Timothy Potter >>>>>>>>>> <thelabd...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Ahem ... unfortunately there will not be an 8.10 RC >>>>>>>>>> this week. I'm >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> headed out on vacation tomorrow, back at keys on >>>>>>>>>> Monday, Sept 20 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> unless someone else wants to pick up the RM duties >>>>>>>>>> before then? >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> After failing the test suite at various places and >>>>>>>>>> other weirdness >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> like .asc files not getting created, I finally got to >>>>>>>>>> the smoke test >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> part, which is now failing with: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> File >>>>>>>>>> "/Users/tjp/.lucene-releases/8.10.0/lucene-solr/dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py", >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> line 176, in checkJARMetaData >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> raise RuntimeError('%s is missing "%s" inside its >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF (wrong git revision?)' % \ >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> RuntimeError: JAR file >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "/Users/tjp/.lucene-releases/8.10.0/RC1/smoketest/unpack/lucene-8.10.0/benchmark/lucene-benchmark-8.10.0.jar" >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> is missing "Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> ecf5c747e6df418dd05a18af327c20051f0584d7" inside its >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF (wrong git revision?) >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> FWIW, I verified that the other Lucene JAR files have >>>>>>>>>> this line in >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> them, such as core: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Manifest-Version: 1.0 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Ant-Version: Apache Ant 1.9.15 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Created-By: 1.8.0_265-b01 (AppleJDK-8.0.265.1.1) >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Extension-Name: org.apache.lucene >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Specification-Title: Lucene Search Engine: core >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Specification-Version: 8.10.0 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Implementation-Title: org.apache.lucene >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Implementation-Version: 8.10.0 >>>>>>>>>> ecf5c747e6df418dd05a18af327c20051f0584d >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> 7 - tjp - 2021-09-14 19:08:42 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> X-Compile-Source-JDK: 8 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> X-Compile-Target-JDK: 8 >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> Multi-Release: true >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 1:21 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> > All the best, this is the worst step. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> > On Tue, 14 Sep, 2021, 10:47 pm Timothy Potter, >>>>>>>>>> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> Building RC1 now ... stay tuned. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 2:30 PM Timothy Potter >>>>>>>>>> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > Thanks for the update Mike! >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > I'm backporting SOLR-15620 right now and am >>>>>>>>>> cooking up a quick PR for >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > SOLR-15621, which looks like an easy win for the >>>>>>>>>> issue Cassandra >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > reported on Slack earlier today. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > Cheers, >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > Tim >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 11:32 AM Mike Drob >>>>>>>>>> <md...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > Hi Tim, I'm still working on SOLR-15555, the >>>>>>>>>> code and benchmarking >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > both look pretty good, but I've got a few last >>>>>>>>>> unit tests that I need >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > to chase down. Hopefully taken care of by today >>>>>>>>>> or tomorrow, I'll be >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > sure to keep you updated though. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 11:39 AM Timothy Potter >>>>>>>>>> <thelabd...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > I found >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15620 while testing >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > the schema designer. I haven't built the RC >>>>>>>>>> yet, so going to see if I >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > can get this in today. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 12:36 PM Timothy >>>>>>>>>> Potter <thelabd...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > NOTICE: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > Branch branch_8_10 has been cut and >>>>>>>>>> versions updated to 8.11 on stable branch. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > Please observe the normal rules: >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * No new features may be committed to the >>>>>>>>>> branch. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * Documentation patches, build patches and >>>>>>>>>> serious bug fixes may be >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > committed to the branch. However, you >>>>>>>>>> should submit all patches you >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > want to commit to Jira first to give >>>>>>>>>> others the chance to review >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > and possibly vote against the patch. Keep >>>>>>>>>> in mind that it is our >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > main intention to keep the branch as >>>>>>>>>> stable as possible. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * All patches that are intended for the >>>>>>>>>> branch should first be committed >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > to the unstable branch, merged into the >>>>>>>>>> stable branch, and then into >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > the current release branch. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * Normal unstable and stable branch >>>>>>>>>> development may continue as usual. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > However, if you plan to commit a big >>>>>>>>>> change to the unstable branch >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > while the branch feature freeze is in >>>>>>>>>> effect, think twice: can't the >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > addition wait a couple more days? Merges >>>>>>>>>> of bug fixes into the branch >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > may become more difficult. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > * Only Jira issues with Fix version 8.10 >>>>>>>>>> and priority "Blocker" will delay >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > a release candidate build. >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > > ---- >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > >>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> > > > 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...@solr.apache.org >>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>>>>>>> dev-h...@solr.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...@solr.apache.org >>>>>>>>>> : > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.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 >>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -Hoss >>>>>>>>>> http://www.lucidworks.com/ >>>>>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >>>>>>>> >>> ________________________________ >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >>> >> -- >> Uwe Schindler >> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen >> https://www.thetaphi.de --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
