On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 4:50 PM Adrien Grand wrote:
> It's not fully clear to me why this question is important in the context
> of 9.0, is it because we are considering having a long delay between Lucene
> 9.0 and Solr 9.0 and we would like to avoid keeping Solr without a release
> for too long?
I don't think you are missing something, Jan, but I would rather not
introduce exceptions in order to keep things simple for users.
It's not fully clear to me why this question is important in the context of
9.0, is it because we are considering having a long delay between Lucene
9.0 and Solr 9.0
Can we not write in 8.9 notes that upgrades to 9.0 may work but is not
officially supported, and that they should wait for 9.1. Then add 8.9 back
compact tests to 9.1. Am I missing something?
Jan Høydahl
> 16. jan. 2021 kl. 18:43 skrev Adrien Grand :
>
>
>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 8:02 PM Da
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 8:02 PM David Smiley wrote:
> I'm not familiar with why the testing needs to be manual instead of
> automated. After having a RC of 8.9, couldn't we add the back-compat
> indices to branch_9x and check that 9.0 is happy with them (running
> applicable automated tests) as
Hi ,
Our team is using the recently introduced Lucene90Codec support for
vectors. We have a use case to quickly scan a segment for documents having
vectors. While implementing it, we noticed that the advance function in
the class Lucene90VectorReader does a linear search for the target document.
Great summary Houston!
Could also be that docker team is willing to provide a “link” from official
_/solr to apache/solr if we can convince them of solid quality. Think they do
this for elastic images already.
Since Docker images contain Linux and Java, which we would not be allowed to
release
This is very cool, thanks for sharing Anton!
Le ven. 15 janv. 2021 à 23:40, Anton Hägerstrand a
écrit :
> Hello everyone!
>
> I recently wrote a blog post which looks into profiling data of the Lucene
> nightl benchmarks. I emailed Michael McCandless (the maintainer of the
> benchmarks) and he s