Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC3

+1 SUCCESS! [0:22:54.616680] Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 7:07 PM Nhat Nguyen wrote: > SUCCESS! [1:30:00.371232] > > +1 > > On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 1:30 PM Chris Hegarty > wrote: > >> >> SUCCESS! [1:10:30.653744] >> >> +1 >> >> -Chris. >> >> >> > On 5

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC3

SUCCESS! [1:30:00.371232] +1 On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 1:30 PM Chris Hegarty wrote: > > SUCCESS! [1:10:30.653744] > > +1 > > -Chris. > > > > On 5 Oct 2024, at 18:36, Luca Cavanna wrote: > > > > Please vote for release candidate 3 for Lucene 10.0.0 > > > > I published a draft of the release notes

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC3

SUCCESS! [1:10:30.653744] +1 -Chris. > On 5 Oct 2024, at 18:36, Luca Cavanna wrote: > > Please vote for release candidate 3 for Lucene 10.0.0 > > I published a draft of the release notes at > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/Release+Notes+10.0.0 . > Feedback is welcome.

Re: A note on which branch to target when backporting

Hi, > On 4 Oct 2024, at 16:08, Chris Hegarty wrote: > >> ... > > I just re-checked, and branch_9x has nothing in it that is not already in > branch_9_12. > > I’ll delete branch_9x tomorrow, if there are not ob

Re: A note on which branch to target when backporting

Hi, > On 4 Oct 2024, at 14:03, Luca Cavanna wrote: > > Good point Chris, I've seen some confusion as well around the topic. > > On branch_9x, shall we remove the branch to prevent further confusion? I just re-checked, and branch_9x has nothing in it that is not already in

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

I'm afraid we have found a blocker for the release: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13856 . Let's discuss further in the github issue. I am happy to respin once we have sorted this out. Cheers Luca On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 4:56 AM Michael McCandless wrote: > +1 > > SUCCESS! [0:37:28.5116

Re: A note on which branch to target when backporting

Good point Chris, I've seen some confusion as well around the topic. On branch_9x, shall we remove the branch to prevent further confusion? Cheers Luca On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 2:57 PM Chris Hegarty wrote: > Hi, > > Since we bumped and stabilised the main branch to 11, and also cut the > branche

Re: I Have a Question in 'BaseTokenStreamTestCase.java'

Thank you for your response, @Michael Sokolov. I will make sure to study more about the “fuzz testing” you mentioned. The reason for my question this time is related to the KoreanTokenizerFactory test code. When using assertTokenStreamContents, which compares typeAttributes, it throws the “java

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [0:37:28.511639] Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 3:44 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe wrote: > +1 > SUCCESS! [1:46:57.466093] > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 11:43 AM Michael Sokolov > wrote: > >> um, +1 >> >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 10:39 AM Michael Sok

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [1:46:57.466093] On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 11:43 AM Michael Sokolov wrote: > um, +1 > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 10:39 AM Michael Sokolov > wrote: > > > > SUCCESS! [1:24:53.393070] > > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 9:43 AM Benjamin Trent > wrote: > > > > > > +1 SUCCESS! [0:56:38.403983] >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

SUCCESS! [1:24:53.393070] On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 9:43 AM Benjamin Trent wrote: > > +1 SUCCESS! [0:56:38.403983] > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 5:51 AM Stefan Vodita wrote: > > > > +1 SUCCESS! [0:39:04.597088] > > > > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 at 07:48, Luca Cavanna wrote: > >> > >> Please vote for rel

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

um, +1 On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 10:39 AM Michael Sokolov wrote: > > SUCCESS! [1:24:53.393070] > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 9:43 AM Benjamin Trent wrote: > > > > +1 SUCCESS! [0:56:38.403983] > > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 5:51 AM Stefan Vodita > > wrote: > > > > > > +1 SUCCESS! [0:39:04.597088] > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [0:56:38.403983] On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 5:51 AM Stefan Vodita wrote: > > +1 SUCCESS! [0:39:04.597088] > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 at 07:48, Luca Cavanna wrote: >> >> Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 10.0.0 >> >> I published a draft of the release notes at >> https://cwiki

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [0:39:04.597088] On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 at 07:48, Luca Cavanna wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 10.0.0 > > I published a draft of the release notes at > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/Release+Notes+10.0.0 . > Feedback is welcome. Feel free to e

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1

> On 2 Oct 2024, at 15:20, Luca Cavanna wrote: > > ... > My understanding is that before respinning, we want to add additional tests > to reproduce the issue and ensure it is fixed. Does that align with your > expectations? Anything to add? > The test has been added, see https://github.com

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1

or variants. > > Thanks, > Christine > > From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 10/02/24 10:06:56 UTC+1:00 > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1 > > Hi Mike, > Thanks for raising your concern. > > Do you have any more insight into t

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1

0To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1 Hi Mike, Thanks for raising your concern. Do you have any more insight into the cause of the nightly test hang? I'd like to understand if it may be caused by recent changes on main, env issues, or a pre-existing is

Re: BWC testing is borked on main

> On 1 Oct 2024, at 20:50, Chris Hegarty wrote: > >> ... >> >> I’m working on it, and hope to have the BWC testing issues resolved soon. > > I opened the following PR to address this - > https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13848 Merged - bwc and main should be stable again. Thanks Robert

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1

Hi Mike, Thanks for raising your concern. Do you have any more insight into the cause of the nightly test hang? I'd like to understand if it may be caused by recent changes on main, env issues, or a pre-existing issue that may be part of already released code. I've been looking at jenkins (https:

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1

Hi Team, I'm worried about https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13844 -- a hang during HNSW indexing, uncovered in nightly benchy. I'm seeing if the hang reproduces ... but it might be a blocker for 10.0.0 release if it's real / repros? Then again, it must be quite rare ... Mike McCandless

Re: BWC testing is borked on main

> On 1 Oct 2024, at 14:47, Chris Hegarty wrote: > > Hi, > > I know that this is broken - I broke it when cutting the 10xx branches, so > that the 10 release can start. > > I know that this is disruptive, since it’s not possible to get a clean PR on > main. > > I’m working on it, and hope

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 10.0.0 RC1

SUCCESS! [0:53:16.589622] +1 (binding) -Chris. > On 1 Oct 2024, at 16:32, Luca Cavanna wrote: > > Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 10.0.0 > > I published a draft of the release notes at > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/Release+Notes+10.0.0 . > Feedback is

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

Uwe, > On 1 Oct 2024, at 08:08, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > Hi, > are we ready for a release. Because at moment I don't think we have fully > cleaned up the codecs and this could lead to problems when going to 11.x > because of version numbers in the index files!? > • Rename the most recent c

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

Oh Thanks, did not notice. So all looks fine. Because I was checking and found only 9.x files. We still have some 9.x codec versions in the checkout, but thats the same for older ones. The only important thing is that the top-level codec is on 10.x, we don't need to care about postings, docv

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

Hi, are we ready for a release. Because at moment I don't think we have fully cleaned up the codecs and this could lead to problems when going to 11.x because of version numbers in the index files!? * Rename the most recent codec to 10x * Remove older 9.x stuff and move to backwards, only k

Re: Preparation and branching for Lucene 10

Uwe, > On 30 Sep 2024, at 16:38, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > Hi, > Am 30.09.2024 um 12:46 schrieb Chris Hegarty: >> Uwe, >> Can you please adjust the Jenkins to build and test these new 10xx branches? >> Or lemme know what I can do to make this happen. > This is a bit of non-easy-scriptable-click-

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

Hi all, given Adrien's limited availability, Chris and I flipped a coin and decided that I will be the release manager for Lucene 10. branch_10x and branch_10_0 have already been created. I will follow up with the first RC tomorrow. On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 5:14 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > FYI I hav

Re: Preparation and branching for Lucene 10

Hi, Am 30.09.2024 um 12:46 schrieb Chris Hegarty: Uwe, Can you please adjust the Jenkins to build and test these new 10xx branches? Or lemme know what I can do to make this happen. This is a bit of non-easy-scriptable-click-work, will look into it soon (it could possibly be scripted, but

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

FYI I have little availability this week so Luca and Chris offered to help with the release. Thank you both! Le sam. 14 sept. 2024, 18:07, Luca Cavanna a écrit : > On the topic of removing search(Query, Collector), I think it is unlikely > that we will be able to complete that task before the Lu

Re: Preparation and branching for Lucene 10

Thanks, done On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:39 AM Chris Hegarty wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > > On 30 Sep 2024, at 15:35, Michael Sokolov wrote: > > > > Chris - I wonder if it would be OK to cherry-pick > > f2b2bfc414873558bf8a18be3c40fe67939dd25e to branch_10_0? It is a > > doc-only update referring to a

Re: Preparation and branching for Lucene 10

Hi Mike, > On 30 Sep 2024, at 15:35, Michael Sokolov wrote: > > Chris - I wonder if it would be OK to cherry-pick > f2b2bfc414873558bf8a18be3c40fe67939dd25e to branch_10_0? It is a > doc-only update referring to a change that is on that branch. That sounds fine to me. -Chris. > On Mon, Sep 30

Re: Preparation and branching for Lucene 10

Chris - I wonder if it would be OK to cherry-pick f2b2bfc414873558bf8a18be3c40fe67939dd25e to branch_10_0? It is a doc-only update referring to a change that is on that branch. On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 6:47 AM Chris Hegarty wrote: > > Hi, > > In preparation for the upcoming Lucene 10 release: > >

Re: Preparation and branching for Lucene 10

The bump to 11 in main has completely borked the backward compat tests. Sorry. Is there a way to quickly mute them, until they can be fixed up properly? -Chris. > On 30 Sep 2024, at 11:46, Chris Hegarty > wrote: > > Hi, > > In preparation for the upcoming Lucene 10 release: > > 1. The main

Re: I Have a Question in 'BaseTokenStreamTestCase.java'

Lucene's test framework makes heavy use of randomization in order to explore more of the vast space of possible states. You might be familiar with this as "fuzz testing"? There's a blog post about it here (from 2011!) https://blog.mikemccandless.com/2011/03/your-test-cases-should-sometimes-fail.htm

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+16) - Build # 50364 - Unstable!

I pushed a fix for this case as well as the other recent fail, which was due to an incorrect assertion added in a recent change on the random-access-vectors branch that was adding safety to the iterator used during merging, where we assume that only a single iterator will be used to access values a

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+16) - Build # 50364 - Unstable!

These failures relate to the way Arrays.binarySearch works when there are repeated values, in which case the result is undefined (it can be any of the indexes with the value), but in SlowCompositeReaderWrapper we are relying on finding the lowest-indexed of the repeats. I'll work on a fix On Sat,

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

SUCCESS! [0:59:38.025612] +1 On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 6:01 AM 张超 wrote: > > +1 > > SUCCESS! [1:11:28.608954] > > 2024年9月27日 04:35，Dawid Weiss 写道： > > > SUCCESS! [3:04:58.589040] > > +1. Thank you, Chris. > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 7:02 PM Chris Hegarty > wrote: >> >> Please vote for release c

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 12:51 PM Dawid Weiss wrote: > > >> Mike's laptop is more than 2x faster than mine?!?!? Dang, do I need an >> upgrade? > > > Mike lives in the future and only occasionally drops by to the present. > His computers are also from the future. It's always been like this - you >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [1:11:28.608954] > 2024年9月27日 04:35，Dawid Weiss 写道： > > > SUCCESS! [3:04:58.589040] > > +1. Thank you, Chris. > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 7:02 PM Chris Hegarty > wrote: >> Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 9.12.0 >> >> This build includes the bwc stuff with 8.11.4

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

SUCCESS! [3:04:58.589040] +1. Thank you, Chris. On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 7:02 PM Chris Hegarty wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 9.12.0 > > This build includes the bwc stuff with 8.11.4. > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lu

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

SUCCESS! [0:56:04.683348] +1 (binding) - Houston On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 4:02 AM Uwe Schindler wrote: > The latest smoketester run with all JDKs including JDK 23 succeeded > after 3.5 hrs: > > https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/37/console > > Tested were: > Java 11 JAVA_HOME

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

The latest smoketester run with all JDKs including JDK 23 succeeded after 3.5 hrs: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/37/console Tested were: Java 11 JAVA_HOME=/home/jenkins/tools/java/64bit/hotspot/latest-jdk11 Java 17 JAVA_HOME=/home/jenkins/tools/java/64bit/hotspot/latest-

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 (binding) SUCCESS! [0:49:03.649046] On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 9:23 AM Ignacio Vera wrote: > +1 (binding) > > SUCCESS! [1:09:46.441375] > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 8:43 AM Anshum Gupta > wrote: > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > SUCCESS! [0:51:16.934304] > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 9:57 AM Chri

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 (binding) SUCCESS! [1:09:46.441375] On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 8:43 AM Anshum Gupta wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > SUCCESS! [0:51:16.934304] > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 9:57 AM Chris Hegarty > wrote: >> >> Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 9.12.0 >> >> This build includes the bwc stu

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 (binding) SUCCESS! [0:51:16.934304] On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 9:57 AM Chris Hegarty wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 9.12.0 > > This build includes the bwc stuff with 8.11.4. > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/luce

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

> Mike's laptop is more than 2x faster than mine?!?!? Dang, do I need an > upgrade? Mike lives in the future and only occasionally drops by to the present. His computers are also from the future. It's always been like this - you can check the archives. You can't buy his "beast" machine because it

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 (binding) SUCCESS! [0:43:49.760748] Let's go Chris! Mike's laptop is more than 2x faster than mine?!?!? Dang, do I need an upgrade? On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 2:57 PM Jan Høydahl wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Just ran smoke tester > > SUCCESS! [1:05:22.107463] > > Jan > > > 25. sep. 2024 kl. 18:

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 (binding) Just ran smoke tester SUCCESS! [1:05:22.107463] Jan > 25. sep. 2024 kl. 18:57 skrev Chris Hegarty > : > > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 9.12.0 > > This build includes the bwc stuff with 8.11.4. > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > https://dist.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC2

+1 to release: SUCCESS! [0:19:16.468055] Thanks Chris! Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 9:57 AM Chris Hegarty wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 2 for Lucene 9.12.0 > > This build includes the bwc stuff with 8.11.4. > > The artifacts can be down

Re: TestBackwardsCompatibility is missing 8.11.4

Hi Uwe, Thanks for following up. I managed to get the back compat indices created and merged (by using Ubuntu, rather than my much newer Mac!!) Thanks, -Chris. > On 25 Sep 2024, at 16:44, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > Maybe this same issue with ANT and ANT_OPTS? > https://lists.apache.org/thread/

Re: TestBackwardsCompatibility is missing 8.11.4

Maybe this same issue with ANT and ANT_OPTS? https://lists.apache.org/thread/0znxm3yltnkbv0sq4l6hxpljrqr1bok9 Ant versions shipped with operating systems are "misconfigured". Uwe Am 25.09.2024 um 12:22 schrieb Chris Hegarty: Hi Houston, On 25 Sep 2024, at 09:56, Chris Hegarty wrote: Thank

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Thanks so much for getting the back compat stuff started Chris, that's a lot of help. I'm comparing these to the commits I made for the 8.11.3 release, and there are some discrepancies. But we can take care of that on the PRs. - Houston On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 8:37 AM Chris Hegarty < christopher

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Hi, > On 25 Sep 2024, at 13:08, Michael McCandless > wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 7:01 AM Chris Hegarty > wrote: > > > +1 for release, unless the uncovered issue with TieredMergePolicy causes > > malfunction. > > My analysis concludes that there is no product bug here. Yeah, maybe th

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 7:01 AM Chris Hegarty < christopher.hega...@elastic.co> wrote: > +1 for release, unless the uncovered issue with TieredMergePolicy causes > malfunction. > > My analysis concludes that there is no product bug here. Yeah, maybe the > policy could be a little more aggressive i

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Hi, > On 24 Sep 2024, at 09:37, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > At least one run with all JDKs including JDK 23 succeeded after approx 4 hrs: > https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/36/console > Tested were: > Java 11 JAVA_HOME=/home/jenkins/tools/java/64bit/hotspot/latest-jdk11 > Java

Re: TestBackwardsCompatibility is missing 8.11.4

Hi Houston, > On 25 Sep 2024, at 09:56, Chris Hegarty > wrote: > > Thanks Dawid, > > This was expected - good that it was caught. > > I filed https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13821 I tried, but was unsuccessful in creating these 8.11.4 backwards compat indices :-( 1. I tried buildi

Re: TestBackwardsCompatibility is missing 8.11.4

Ah... thanks Chris! D. On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 10:56 AM Chris Hegarty wrote: > Thanks Dawid, > > This was expected - good that it was caught. > > I filed https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13821 > > -Chris. > > > On 25 Sep 2024, at 07:25, Dawid Weiss wrote: > > > > > > Nightly smoke teste

Re: TestBackwardsCompatibility is missing 8.11.4

Thanks Dawid, This was expected - good that it was caught. I filed https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13821 -Chris. > On 25 Sep 2024, at 07:25, Dawid Weiss wrote: > > > Nightly smoke tester failed last night: > https://github.com/apache/lucene/actions/runs/11025229258/job/30619746011 >

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

Great catch! I'll remove that from this release and fix it before sending out the announcement to the mailing lists. - Houston On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:05 PM Koji Sekiguchi wrote: > Hi > > > This vote has PASSED > > Congrats! > > I've read the release news at > https://solr.apache.org/news.ht

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

Hi > This vote has PASSED Congrats! I've read the release news at https://solr.apache.org/news.html#apache-solrtm-8114-available and it says - Solr is the blazing-fast, open source, multi-modal search platform built on Apache Lucene. It powers full-text, vector, analytics, and geospatial se

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

It's been >72h since the vote was initiated and the result is: +1 5 (5 binding) 0 0 -1 0 This vote has PASSED On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 12:41 PM Jan Høydahl wrote: > +1 > > SUCCESS! [1:29:27.098734] (on fifth run or something) > > Jan > > 19. sep. 2024 kl. 20:51 skrev Houston Putman : > > P

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [1:29:27.098734] (on fifth run or something) Jan > 19. sep. 2024 kl. 20:51 skrev Houston Putman : > > Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-8.11.4-RC1-reve27f4

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+12) - Build # 50237 - Failure!

> > But it is still strange why this happens at all, because this should not > happen randomly, because Gradlew always runs with same JDK version (minimum > required for build). So it can't be a Java 24 issue as the subject says. > Thank you. Yes - adding --stacktrace to gradle should give us more

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+12) - Build # 50237 - Failure!

Done. Am 24.09.2024 um 18:33 schrieb Uwe Schindler: Hi, sorry for late reply: Do you mean to add stack traces when invoking Gradlew? Can do that. The build number you mention is no longer accessible (deleted), so I can't check more. If it happens again we may get more information. But it

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+12) - Build # 50237 - Failure!

Hi, sorry for late reply: Do you mean to add stack traces when invoking Gradlew? Can do that. The build number you mention is no longer accessible (deleted), so I can't check more. If it happens again we may get more information. But it is still strange why this happens at all, because this

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

Btw I am +1 (binding) too, I must have missed copying that part of the message. - Houston On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:01 AM Anshum Gupta wrote: > +1 (binding) > > SUCCESS! [1:01:01.305159] > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 11:51 AM Houston Putman > wrote: > >> Please vote for release candidate 1 for

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

+1 (binding) SUCCESS! [1:01:01.305159] On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 11:51 AM Houston Putman wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-8.11.4-RC1-reve27f44e3d78dfcec230c97

Re: Feature freeze for Lucene 9.12

> On 23 Sep 2024, at 15:04, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > I enabled 9.12 Jobs on Policeman Jenkins. Thank you Uwe. -Chris. > ... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

At least one run with all JDKs including JDK 23 succeeded after approx 4 hrs: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/36/console Tested were: Java 11 JAVA_HOME=/home/jenkins/tools/java/64bit/hotspot/latest-jdk11 Java 17 JAVA_HOME=/home/jenkins/tools/java/64bit/hotspot/latest-jdk1

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [1:17:42.134010] -- Thanks Kevin for the tip! On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 9:17 PM Kevin Risden wrote: > +1 > > SUCCESS! [1:10:09.707179] > > Kevin Risden > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:17 PM Kevin Risden wrote: > >> This is the same error I ran into this time and during 8.11.3 - due

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [1:10:09.707179] Kevin Risden On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:17 PM Kevin Risden wrote: > This is the same error I ran into this time and during 8.11.3 - due to Ant > and oh-my-zsh trying to be helpful... > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/0znxm3yltnkbv0sq4l6hxpljrqr1bok9 > > Basically

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

This is the same error I ran into this time and during 8.11.3 - due to Ant and oh-my-zsh trying to be helpful... https://lists.apache.org/thread/0znxm3yltnkbv0sq4l6hxpljrqr1bok9 Basically `unset ANT_ARGS` did the trick. I'm waiting on my smoke test script to run once I remembered past Kevin being

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.11.4 RC1

Hmmm, I haven't seen this before: Verify... confirm all releases have coverage in TestBackwardsCompatibility find all past Lucene releases... run TestBackwardsCompatibility.. Backcompat testing not required for release 9.9.2 because it's not less than 8.11.4 Backcompat t

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Thanks for the offer Chris, I'll definitely take you up on that! And hopefully its done in a day or two. - Houston On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 3:28 PM Chris Hegarty wrote: > Thanks Uwe, > > I reproduced this failure on main and branch_9_12. > > The following issue has been created to track this, >

Re: Stacked tokens of differing character length - what does it *actually* break?

IMO the offset ordering constraint should have been a SHOULD not a MUST. I'm not aware of any actual impact of non-ascending ordering. Where I work, we have a fork of Lucene to modify the one-liner enforcement of the rule. We've noticed no ill-effects. It had been like this for years, back into

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Thanks Uwe, I reproduced this failure on main and branch_9_12. The following issue has been created to track this, https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/13818. Git bisect has identified the first failure as "Add target search concurrency to TieredMergePolicy (#13430)" -Chris. > On 23 Sep 2

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Hi Houston, If you plan to release 8.11.4 soon, then I’ll pickup whatever is needed in 9.12 for bw-compat indices. -Chris. > On 20 Sep 2024, at 18:08, Adrien Grand wrote: > > In theory it's better to start the vote after 8.11.4 is out and the bw-compat > indices have been merged into branch_

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Unfortunately, the first Smoketester run failed with a test failure (in Java 19): TestTieredMergePolicy > testSimulateAppendOnly FAILED     java.lang.AssertionError: mergeFactor=4 minSegmentBytes=38,046,720 maxMergedSegmentBytes=5,213,519,872 segmentsPerTier=4.0 maxMergeAtOnce=24 numSegmen

Re: Feature freeze for Lucene 9.12

I enabled 9.12 Jobs on Policeman Jenkins. Uwe Am 20.09.2024 um 18:02 schrieb Chris Hegarty: Hi, All blockers have been addressed. The `branch_9_12` has been cut, and the RC vote is underway. Note: Since 9.12 will be the last in the 9.x series, then no version 9.13 constants have been adde

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Hi, I started Policeman Jenkins with full support of JDKs (11, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 GA), this may take a while see here: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/35/console. Uwe Am 20.09.2024 um 18:02 schrieb Chris Hegarty: Hi, Please vote for release candidate 1 for Luc

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

In theory it's better to start the vote after 8.11.4 is out and the bw-compat indices have been merged into branch_9_12 to make sure 8.11.4 indices can be read. That said, 8.11.4 has tiny changes, and no changes in file formats in particular. Plus 9.11 is also supposed to read 8.11.4 as well but i

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.12.0 RC1

Hi, I’m aware that I initiated this vote while the 8.11.4 vote is still underway, the voting periods overlap somewhat. If there is any technical, or otherwise, reason to respin the 9.12 RC build, then I’m happy to do so. And/or extend the voting period here. -Chris. > On 20 Sep 2024, at 17:02

Re: Feature freeze for Lucene 9.12

Hi, All blockers have been addressed. The `branch_9_12` has been cut, and the RC vote is underway. Note: Since 9.12 will be the last in the 9.x series, then no version 9.13 constants have been added. I may have missed some communication, but I’m not sure where to update CI jobs these days so

Re: Feature freeze for Lucene 9.12

Hi, For Lucene 9.12, we have the following blocking issues: 1. TestLucene90DocValuesFormat fails with ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException 2. TestBestCompressionLucene80DocValuesFormat fails with ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException 3. TestBestSpeedLucene80DocValuesFormat fails dv for field: sorted_set has

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+12) - Build # 50237 - Failure!

Hi Uwe! Could you add the "--stacktrace" switch to your jenkins jobs (or at least this one)? I wonder where this failure points at and it's impossible to figure out from the logs alone: 1: Task failed with an exception. --- * What went wrong: Failed to notify build model lifecycle listene

Re: Lucene 10 interview

Excellent. Thanks. I’m on Eastern US time (or, will be as soon as I get home this weekend!) and will contact you off-list with some possible times we can do this. —Rich > On Sep 18, 2024, at 1:28 PM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > Hey Rich, > > I'd be happy to participate in an interview on Lucene

Re: Lucene 10 interview

Hey Rich, I'd be happy to participate in an interview on Lucene 10. On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 12:48 PM Rich Bowen wrote: > Hi, folks, > > As you might know, I run feathercast.apache.org and I'd love to do an > interview with someone about the upcoming 10.0 release, if there's someone > who would

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

On the topic of removing search(Query, Collector), I think it is unlikely that we will be able to complete that task before the Lucene 10 branch is cut. It would be nice to still work on the remaining issues, but it's probably good to have less urgency around it hence more time to think about how t

Re: Feature freeze for Lucene 9.12 and Lucene 10.0

Thanks Mike for reminding me, I had indeed said I'd branch 10_0 on the week of the 23rd. Then I will only branch branch_9_12 and sunset branch_9x next week. main will be bumped to 11.0, and branch_10x and branch_10_0 will be creat

Re: Feature freeze for Lucene 9.12 and Lucene 10.0

Hi Adrien, I thought we had another week? I looked back at Old emails and thought you had targeted SEP 22 for feature freeze? On Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 7:45 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > Hello everyone, > > As previously discussed, I plan on feature freezing Lucene 9.12 and Lucene > 10.0 next week. Prac

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-22) - Build # 50139 - Unstable!

PR for this is and a bunch of other failures around early termination in top score doc collection is here: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13777 . I initially got confused and thought it was not a good solution, but I am happy to have been wrong :) On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 8:28 PM Luca Cavann

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

Aha! I realized that I was totally misreading some stacktraces while debugging some of the Join tests. You're absolutely right that a ScorerSupplier is created for each doc ID range -- not just the Scorer. Also, the test that I "helped" Vamsi with didn't really get fixed by moving construction of t

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-22) - Build # 50139 - Unstable!

This is the same failure as TestPrefixRandom, nothing new, but yet to be solved. On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 7:37 PM Policeman Jenkins Server < jenk...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Build: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-main-Linux/50139/ > Java: 64bit/hotspot/jdk-22 -XX:+UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseG1G

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-21.0.1) - Build # 50111 - Unstable!

I opened https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13775 with a proposed solution. On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 11:07 AM Luca Cavanna wrote: > The problem here is that TopScoreDocCollectorManager creates a priority > queue of 250_000 for every collector it creates. This test only ever > indexes max 1000

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-24-ea+12) - Build # 50125 - Unstable!

I opened https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13774 for this failure and all the recent others around TestTaxonomyFacetValueSource . Seems like the tests were failing only with jdk23 and jdk24, I could not reproduce locally. On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 2:33 AM Policeman Jenkins Server < jenk...@theta

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene » Lucene-Coverage-main - Build # 1216 - Unstable!

I opened https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13773 to address this. On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 5:29 AM Apache Jenkins Server < jenk...@builds.apache.org> wrote: > Build: > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Lucene/job/Lucene-Coverage-main/1216/ > > 1 tests failed. > FAILED: org.apache.lucene.search

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-23-rc) - Build # 50116 - Unstable!

Another TestRandomPrefix failure, I opened https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13773 to address this. On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 2:39 PM Policeman Jenkins Server < jenk...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Build: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-main-Linux/50116/ > Java: 64bit/hotspot/jdk-23-rc -XX:+Use

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-22) - Build # 50120 - Unstable!

I opened https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/13773 to address this. On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 8:39 PM Policeman Jenkins Server < jenk...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Build: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-main-Linux/50120/ > Java: 64bit/hotspot/jdk-22 -XX:-UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseG1GC > > 1 tes

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-main-Linux (64bit/hotspot/jdk-21.0.1) - Build # 50111 - Unstable!

The problem here is that TopScoreDocCollectorManager creates a priority queue of 250_000 for every collector it creates. This test only ever indexes max 1000 documents. In the case I examined we had 8 segments, which get partitioned into 5 partitions each. That means we will build 40 priority queue

Re: Lucene 10.0 and 9.12 blockers

Thanks for raising this Michael. I see a risk as well around removing the deprecated search(Query, Collector) method by using a sequential collector manager. Previously, we would happily execute sequentially despite an executor being provided to the searcher (because search(Query, Collector) bypas

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >