Hello everyone!

Thank you for discussing this.

There were two bugs during the release of 8.10.0. I considered the first
bug wasn't a blocker to respin 8.10.0 RC1 and it made into 8.10.0 RC2.
However, Mayya discovered that the second bug had a severe impact on search
after requests with sort, and we didn't fully understand its severity until
8.10.0 was out.
Although the bug has been in the previous versions, I am +1 to release
8.10.1  to reduce the impact.

Best Regards,
Nhat

On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 2:36 PM Timothy Potter <[email protected]> wrote:

> I agree with Mike on this one as well. In addition, I'm surprised
> nobody asked to halt the RC1 and make RC2 with Nhat's fix while I was
> doing 8.10. Nhat made it sound like it was not a big deal at the time,
> but now there's some urgency in releasing it?
>
> Tim
>
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 11:15 AM Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > It feels weird to say that I’m against releases, but generally I feel
> like bug fix releases should be scoped either for a regression discovered
> in that release or for rapid security fixes. Otherwise, what’s the harm in
> waiting for the next release train?
> >
> > Obviously any committee is free to create a release candidate on any
> commit, and if there are three PMC members in support then a release can
> happen, but I don’t want to be putting pressure on ourselves where we are
> constantly in the middle of a release cycle.
> >
> > Or waiting a month and doing 8.11 seems fine too?
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 8:17 AM Adrien Grand <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike, it's unclear to me if you are suggesting waiting before doing a
> 8.10.1 release? On my end I'm good with doing a 8.10.1 release now, we
> could still do a 8.10.2 release later in case we find new bugs?
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 10:41 PM Mayya Sharipova <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> No, the bug is not new and was present in the previous versions as
> well, but was discovered quite recently.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:54 PM Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Is the bug new in 8.10? If it affects older versions as well then I
> feel like 8.10.1 might be less urgent.
> >>>>
> >>>> Mike
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 2:14 PM Adrien Grand <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 to a 8.10.1 patch release
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 2:03 AM Mayya Sharipova <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks for the update, Robert.  Would be nice to have these  bug
> fixes as well.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 7:56 PM Robert Muir <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> FYI Looks like there are already six items currently listed under
> >>>>>>> "Bugfixes" for 8.11.0, so those could be candidates for the patch
> >>>>>>> release.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Bug Fixes
> >>>>>>> ---------------------
> >>>>>>> * LUCENE-10110: MultiCollector now handles single leaf collector
> that
> >>>>>>> wants to skip low-scoring hits
> >>>>>>> but the combined score mode doesn't allow it. (Jim Ferenczi)
> >>>>>>> * LUCENE-10111: Missing calculating the bytes used of
> DocsWithFieldSet
> >>>>>>> in NormValuesWriter.
> >>>>>>> (Lu Xugang)
> >>>>>>> * LUCENE-10116: Missing calculating the bytes used of
> DocsWithFieldSet
> >>>>>>> and currentValues in SortedSetDocValuesWriter.
> >>>>>>> (Lu Xugang)
> >>>>>>> * LUCENE-10070 Skip deleted docs when accumulating facet counts for
> >>>>>>> all docs. (Ankur Goel, Greg Miller)
> >>>>>>> * LUCENE-10126: Sort optimization with a chunked bulk scorer
> >>>>>>> can wrongly skip documents (Nhat Nguyen, Mayya Sharipova)
> >>>>>>> * LUCENE-10134: ConcurrentSortedSetDocValuesFacetCounts shouldn't
> >>>>>>> share liveDocs Bits across threads.
> >>>>>>> (Ankur Goel)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 7:46 PM Mayya Sharipova <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>> > Hello everyone!
> >>>>>>> > Thank you, Timothy, for the recent 8.10 release.
> >>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>> > I wonder if we are ok to do a 8.10.1 patch release and do it
> fairly soon? this week?
> >>>>>>> > Nhat fixed a bad bug where "sort with after" on a numeric field
> can incorrectly miss documents. This bug only manifests when sort
> optimization on numeric fields is explicitly enabled.
> >>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>> > Given that we are not sure when the next minor release will be,
> it would be useful to have a patch release.  If nobody is opposed to it,  I
> can volunteer to be the Release Manager.
> >>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>> > Thanks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Adrien
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to