I don't think it is critical for this to be a blocker for 8.0. If it gets fixed in 8.0.1 that's ok too, given this is an ooold bug. I think we should simply remove the buffering feature in the UI and replace it with an error message popup or something. I'll try to take a look next week.
-- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > 25. jan. 2019 kl. 20:39 skrev Tomás Fernández Löbbe <tomasflo...@gmail.com>: > > I think the UI is an important Solr feature. As long as there is a reasonable > time horizon for the issue being resolved I'm +1 on making it a blocker. I'm > not familiar enough with the UI code to help either unfortunately. > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:24 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com > <mailto:gus.h...@gmail.com>> wrote: > It looks like someone tried to make it a blocker once before... And it's > actually a duplicate of an earlier issue > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9818 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9818>). I guess its a question of > whether or not overall quality has a bearing on the decision to release. As > it turns out the screen shot I posted to the issue is less than half of the > shards that eventually got created since there was an outstanding queue of > requests still processing at the time. I'm now having to delete 50 or so > cores, which luckily are small 100 Mb initial testing cores, not the 20GB > cores we'll be testing on in the near future. It more or less makes it > impossible to recommend the use of the admin UI for anything other than read > only observation of the cluster. Now imagine someone leaves a browser window > open and forgets about it rather than browsing away or closing the window, > not knowing that it's silently pumping out requests after showing an error... > would completely hose a node, and until they tracked down the source of the > requests, (hope he didn't go home) it would be impossible to resolve... > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:25 PM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com > <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Releasing a new major is very challenging on its own, I'd rather not > call it a blocker and delay the release for it since this isn't a new > regression in 8.0: it looks like a problem that has affected Solr > since at least 6.3? I'm not familiar with the UI code at all, but > maybe this is something that could get fixed before we build a RC? > > > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 6:06 PM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com > <mailto:gus.h...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > I'd like to suggest that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10211 > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10211> be promoted to block > > 8.0. I just got burned by it a second time. > > > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 1:05 PM Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de > > <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de>> wrote: > >> > >> Cool, > >> > >> I am working on giving my best release time guess as possible on the > >> FOSDEM conference! > >> > >> Uwe > >> > >> ----- > >> Uwe Schindler > >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen > >> http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> > >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> > >> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2019 5:33 PM > >> > To: Lucene Dev <dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>> > >> > Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 8.0 > >> > > >> > +1 to release 7.7 and 8.0 in a row starting on the week of February 4th. > >> > > >> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:23 PM jim ferenczi <jim.feren...@gmail.com > >> > <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > As we agreed some time ago I'd like to start on releasing 8.0. The > >> > > branch is > >> > already created so we can start the process anytime now. Unless there are > >> > objections I'd like to start the feature freeze next week in order to > >> > build the > >> > first candidate the week after. > >> > > We'll also need a 7.7 release but I think we can handle both with Alan > >> > > so > >> > the question now is whether we are ok to start the release process or if > >> > there > >> > are any blockers left ;). > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Le mar. 15 janv. 2019 à 11:35, Alan Woodward <romseyg...@gmail.com > >> > > <mailto:romseyg...@gmail.com>> > >> > a écrit : > >> > >> > >> > >> I’ve started to work through the various deprecations on the new > >> > >> master > >> > branch. There are a lot of them, and I’m going to need some assistance > >> > for > >> > several of them, as it’s not entirely clear what to do. > >> > >> > >> > >> I’ll open two overarching issues in JIRA, one for lucene and one for > >> > >> Solr, > >> > with lists of the deprecations that need to be removed in each one. > >> > I’ll create > >> > a shared branch on gitbox to work against, and push the changes I’ve > >> > already > >> > done there. We can then create individual JIRA issues for any changes > >> > that > >> > are more involved than just deleting code. > >> > >> > >> > >> All assistance gratefully received, particularly for the Solr > >> > >> deprecations > >> > where there’s a lot of code I’m unfamiliar with. > >> > >> > >> > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 09:21, Alan Woodward <romseyg...@gmail.com > >> > >> <mailto:romseyg...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> I think the current plan is to do a 7.7 release at the same time as > >> > >> 8.0, to > >> > handle any last-minute deprecations etc. So let’s keep those jobs > >> > enabled > >> > for now. > >> > >> > >> > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 09:10, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de > >> > >> <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> > >> I will start and add the branch_8x jobs to Jenkins once I have some > >> > >> time > >> > later today. > >> > >> > >> > >> The question: How to proceed with branch_7x? Should we stop using it > >> > and release 7.6.x only (so we would use branch_7_6 only for bugfixes), or > >> > are we planning to one more Lucene/Solr 7.7? In the latter case I would > >> > keep > >> > the jenkins jobs enabled for a while. > >> > >> > >> > >> Uwe > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- > >> > >> Uwe Schindler > >> > >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen > >> > >> http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> > >> > >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de> > >> > >> > >> > >> From: Alan Woodward <romseyg...@gmail.com > >> > >> <mailto:romseyg...@gmail.com>> > >> > >> Sent: Monday, January 7, 2019 11:30 AM > >> > >> To: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 8.0 > >> > >> > >> > >> OK, Christmas caught up with me a bit… I’ve just created a branch for > >> > >> 8x > >> > from master, and am in the process of updating the master branch to > >> > version > >> > 9. New commits that should be included in the 8.0 release should also be > >> > back-ported to branch_8x from master. > >> > >> > >> > >> This is not intended as a feature freeze, as I know there are still > >> > >> some > >> > things being worked on for 8.0; however, it should let us clean up > >> > master by > >> > removing as much deprecated code as possible, and give us an idea of any > >> > replacement work that needs to be done. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 19 Dec 2018, at 15:13, David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com > >> > >> <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> January. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:04 AM S G <sg.online.em...@gmail.com > >> > >> <mailto:sg.online.em...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> It would be nice to see Solr 8 in January soon as there is an > >> > >> enhancement > >> > on nested-documents we are waiting to get our hands on. > >> > >> Any idea when Solr 8 would be out ? > >> > >> > >> > >> Thx > >> > >> SG > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:34 PM David Smiley > >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> I see 10 JIRA issues matching this filter: project in (SOLR, > >> > >> LUCENE) AND > >> > priority = Blocker and status = open and fixVersion = "master (8.0)" > >> > >> click here: > >> > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LU > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LU> > >> > CENE)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20and%20status%20%3D%2 > >> > 0open%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22master%20(8.0)%22%20 > >> > >> > >> > >> Thru the end of the month, I intend to work on those issues not yet > >> > assigned. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 4:51 AM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com > >> > >> <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:38 AM Alan Woodward > >> > <romseyg...@gmail.com <mailto:romseyg...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Now that 7.6 is out of the door (thanks Nick!) we should think about > >> > cutting the 8.0 branch and moving master to 9.0. I’ll volunteer to > >> > create the > >> > branch this week - say Wednesday? Then we should have some time to > >> > clean up the master branch and uncover anything that still needs to be > >> > done > >> > on 8.0 before we start the release process next year. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > On 22 Oct 2018, at 18:12, Cassandra Targett <casstarg...@gmail.com > >> > >> > <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > I'm a bit delayed, but +1 on the 7.6 and 8.0 plan from me too. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:18 AM Erick Erickson > >> > <erickerick...@gmail.com <mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> +1, this gives us all a chance to prioritize getting the blockers > >> > >> >> out > >> > >> >> of the way in a careful manner. > >> > >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:56 AM jim ferenczi > >> > >> >> <jim.feren...@gmail.com <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > +1 too. With this new perspective we could create the branch just > >> > after the 7.6 release and target the 8.0 release for January 2019 which > >> > gives > >> > almost 3 month to finish the blockers ? > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > Le jeu. 18 oct. 2018 à 23:56, David Smiley > >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> +1 to a 7.6 —lots of stuff in there > >> > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:47 PM Nicholas Knize > >> > <nkn...@gmail.com <mailto:nkn...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> If we're planning to postpone cutting an 8.0 branch until a few > >> > weeks from now then I'd like to propose (and volunteer to RM) a 7.6 > >> > release > >> > targeted for late November or early December (following the typical 2 > >> > month > >> > release pattern). It feels like this might give a little breathing room > >> > for > >> > finishing up 8.0 blockers? And looking at the change log there appear to > >> > be a > >> > healthy list of features, bug fixes, and improvements to both Solr and > >> > Lucene > >> > that warrant a 7.6 release? Personally I wouldn't mind releasing the > >> > LatLonShape encoding changes in LUCENE-8521 and selective indexing work > >> > done in LUCENE-8496. Any objections or thoughts? > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> - Nick > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:32 AM Đạt Cao Mạnh > >> > <caomanhdat...@gmail.com <mailto:caomanhdat...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>> Thanks Cassandra and Jim, > >> > >> >> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>> I created a blocker issue for Solr 8.0 SOLR-12883, currently > >> > >> >> >>>> in > >> > jira/http2 branch there are a draft-unmature implementation of SPNEGO > >> > authentication which enough to makes the test pass, this implementation > >> > will > >> > be removed when SOLR-12883 gets resolved . Therefore I don't see any > >> > problem on merging jira/http2 to master branch in the next week. > >> > >> >> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:33 AM jim ferenczi > >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>> > But if you're working with a different assumption - that > >> > >> >> >>>>> > just the > >> > existence of the branch does not stop Dat from still merging his work > >> > and the > >> > work being included in 8.0 - then I agree, waiting for him to merge > >> > doesn't > >> > need to stop the creation of the branch. > >> > >> >> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>> Yes that's my reasoning. This issue is a blocker so we won't > >> > release without it but we can work on the branch in the meantime and let > >> > other people work on new features that are not targeted to 8. > >> > >> >> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 à 20:51, Cassandra Targett > >> > <casstarg...@gmail.com <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>> OK - I was making an assumption that the timeline for the > >> > >> >> >>>>>> first > >> > 8.0 RC would be ASAP after the branch is created. > >> > >> >> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>> It's a common perception that making a branch freezes adding > >> > new features to the release, perhaps in an unofficial way (more of a > >> > courtesy > >> > rather than a rule). But if you're working with a different assumption - > >> > that > >> > just the existence of the branch does not stop Dat from still merging > >> > his work > >> > and the work being included in 8.0 - then I agree, waiting for him to > >> > merge > >> > doesn't need to stop the creation of the branch. > >> > >> >> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>> If, however, once the branch is there people object to Dat > >> > merging his work because it's "too late", then the branch shouldn't be > >> > created yet because we want to really try to clear that blocker for 8.0. > >> > >> >> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>> Cassandra > >> > >> >> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:13 PM jim ferenczi > >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> Ok thanks for answering. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > - I think Solr needs a couple more weeks since the work > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > Dat > >> > is doing isn't quite done yet. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> We can wait a few more weeks to create the branch but I > >> > don't think that one action (creating the branch) prevents the other (the > >> > work Dat is doing). > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> HTTP/2 is one of the blocker for the release but it can be > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> done > >> > in master and backported to the appropriate branch as any other feature ? > >> > We just need an issue with the blocker label to ensure that > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> we don't miss it ;). Creating the branch early would also > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> help > >> > in case you don't want to release all the work at once in 8.0.0. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> Next week was just a proposal, what I meant was soon > >> > because we target a release in a few months. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 à 17:52, Cassandra Targett > >> > <casstarg...@gmail.com <mailto:casstarg...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> IMO next week is a bit too soon for the branch - I think > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> Solr > >> > needs a couple more weeks since the work Dat is doing isn't quite done > >> > yet. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> Solr needs the HTTP/2 work Dat has been doing, and he told > >> > me yesterday he feels it is nearly ready to be merged into master. > >> > However, > >> > it does require a new release of Jetty to Solr is able to retain Kerberos > >> > authentication support (Dat has been working with that team to help test > >> > the > >> > changes Jetty needs to support Kerberos with HTTP/2). They should get > >> > that > >> > release out soon, but we are dependent on them a little bit. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> He can hopefully reply with more details on his status and > >> > what else needs to be done. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> Once Dat merges his work, IMO we should leave it in master > >> > for a little bit. While he has been beasting and testing with Jenkins as > >> > he goes > >> > along, I think it would be good to have all the regular master builds > >> > work on > >> > it for a little bit also. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> Of the other blockers, the only other large-ish one is to > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> fully > >> > remove Trie* fields, which some of us also discussed yesterday and it > >> > seemed we concluded that Solr isn't really ready to do that. The > >> > performance > >> > issues with single value lookups are a major obstacle. It would be nice > >> > if > >> > someone with a bit more experience with that could comment in the issue > >> > (SOLR-12632) and/or unmark it as a blocker. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> Cassandra > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:38 AM Erick Erickson > >> > <erickerick...@gmail.com <mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> I find 9 open blockers for 8.0: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND> > >> > %20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20AND%20status%20%3D%20OPEN > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> As David mentioned, many of the SOlr committers are at > >> > Activate, which > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> ends Thursday so feedback (and work) may be a bit > >> > delayed. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:11 AM David Smiley > >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Hi, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Thanks for volunteering to do the 8.0 release Jim! > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Many of us are at the Activate Conference in Montreal. > >> > We had a committers meeting where we discussed some of the blockers. I > >> > think only a couple items were raised. I'll leave Dat to discuss the > >> > one on > >> > HTTP2. On the Solr nested docs front, I articulated one and we mostly > >> > came > >> > to a decision on how to do it. It's not "hard" just a matter of how to > >> > hook in > >> > some functionality so that it's user-friendly. I'll file an issue for > >> > this. > >> > Inexplicably I'm sheepish about marking issues "blocker" but I shouldn't > >> > be. > >> > I'll file that issue and look at another issue or two that ought to be > >> > blockers. > >> > Nothing is "hard" or tons of work that is in my sphere of work. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > On the Lucene side, I will commit > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7875 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7875> RE MultiFields either > >> > late tonight or tomorrow when I have time. It's ready to be committed; > >> > just > >> > sitting there. It's a minor thing but important to make this change now > >> > before 8.0. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > I personally plan to spend more time on the upcoming > >> > weeks on a few of these 8.0 things. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > ~ David > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:21 AM jim ferenczi > >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Hi, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> We still have two blockers for the Lucene 8 release: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-> > >> > 7075?jql=(project%3D%22Lucene%20- > >> > %20Core%22%20%20OR%20project%3DSOLR)%20AND%20priority%3DBlocke > >> > r%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20 > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> We're planning to work on these issues in the coming > >> > days, are there any other blockers (not in the list) on Solr side. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Now that Lucene 7.5 is released I'd like to create a > >> > Lucene 8 branch soon (next week for instance ? ). There are some work to > >> > do > >> > to make sure that all tests pass, add the new version... > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> I can take care of it if there are no objections. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Creating > >> > the branch in advance would help to stabilize this version (people can > >> > continue to work on new features that are not targeted for 8.0) and > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> we can discuss the best date for the release when all > >> > blockers are resolved. What do you think ? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 11:32, Adrien Grand > >> > <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>> Đạt, is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-> > >> > 12639 the right issue for HTTP/2 support? Should we make it a blocker for > >> > 8.0? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 23:37, Adrien Grand > >> > <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> For the record here is the JIRA query for blockers > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> that > >> > Erick referred to: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR- > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-> > >> > 12720?jql=(project%3D%22Lucene%20- > >> > %20Core%22%20%20OR%20project%3DSOLR)%20AND%20priority%3DBlocke > >> > r%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20 > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 10:36, jim ferenczi > >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Ok thanks Đạt and Erick. I'll follow the blockers > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> on > >> > Jira. Đạt do you have an issue opened for the HTTP/2 support ? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Le ven. 31 août 2018 à 16:40, Erick Erickson > >> > <erickerick...@gmail.com <mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> There's also the issue of what to do as far as > >> > removing Trie* support. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I think there's a blocker JIRA. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> project = SOLR AND priority = Blocker AND > >> > resolution = Unresolved > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Shows 6 blockers > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 4:12 AM Đạt Cao Mạnh > >> > <caomanhdat...@gmail.com <mailto:caomanhdat...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > Hi Jim, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > I really want to introduce the support of HTTP/2 > >> > into Solr 8.0 (currently cooked in jira/http2 branch). The changes of > >> > that > >> > branch are less than Star Burst effort and closer to be merged into > >> > master > >> > branch. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > Thanks! > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:55 PM jim ferenczi > >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com <mailto:jim.feren...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Hi all, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> I'd like to get some feedback regarding the > >> > upcoming Lucene/Solr 8 release. There are still some cleanups and docs to > >> > add on the Lucene side but it seems that all blockers are resolved. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> From a Solr perspective are there any important > >> > changes that need to be done or are we still good with the October > >> > target for > >> > the release ? Adrien mentioned the Star Burst effort some time ago, is it > >> > something that is planned for 8 ? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Cheers, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Jim > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Le mer. 1 août 2018 à 19:02, David Smiley > >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Yes, that new BKD/Points based code is > >> > definitely something we want in 8 or 7.5 -- it's a big deal. I think it > >> > would also > >> > be awesome if we had highlighter that could use the Weight.matches() API > >> > -- > >> > again for either 7.5 or 8. I'm working on this on the > >> > UnifiedHighlighter front > >> > and Alan from other aspects. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> ~ David > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:51 PM Adrien Grand > >> > <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> I was hoping that we would release some bits > >> > of this new support for geo shapes in 7.5 already. We are already very > >> > close > >> > to being able to index points, lines and polygons and query for > >> > intersection > >> > with an envelope. It would be nice to add support for other relations > >> > (eg. > >> > disjoint) and queries (eg. polygon) but the current work looks already > >> > useful > >> > to me. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> Le mer. 1 août 2018 à 17:00, Robert Muir > >> > <rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> My only other suggestion is we may want to > >> > get Nick's shape stuff into > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> the sandbox module at least for 8.0 so that > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> it > >> > can be tested out. I > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> think it looks like that wouldn't delay any > >> > October target though? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Adrien > >> > Grand <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > I'd like to revive this thread now that > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > these > >> > new optimizations for > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > collection of top docs are more usable and > >> > enabled by default in > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > IndexSearcher > >> > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8060 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8060>). Any > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > feedback about starting to work towards > >> > releasing 8.0 and targeting October > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > 2018? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 à 09:31, Adrien Grand > >> > <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> Hi Robert, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> I agree we need to make it more usable > >> > before 8.0. I would also like to > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> improve ReqOptSumScorer > >> > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8204 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8204>) > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> to leverage impacts so that queries that > >> > incorporate queries on feature > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> fields > >> > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8197 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8197>) in an optional > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> clause are also fast. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 à 03:06, Robert Muir > >> > <rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> How can the end user actually use the > >> > biggest new feature: impacts and > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> BMW? As far as I can tell, the issue to > >> > actually implement the > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> necessary API changes > >> > (IndexSearcher/TopDocs/etc) is still open and > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> unresolved, although there are some > >> > interesting ideas on it. This > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> seems like a really big missing piece, > >> > without a proper API, the stuff > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> is not really usable. I also can't > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> imagine a > >> > situation where the API > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> could be introduced in a followup minor > >> > release because it would be > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> too invasive. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Adrien > >> > Grand <jpou...@gmail.com <mailto:jpou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Hi all, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > I would like to start discussing > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > releasing > >> > Lucene/Solr 8.0. Lucene 8 > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > already > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > has some good changes around > >> > scoring, notably cleanups to > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > similarities[1][2][3], indexing of > >> > impacts[4], and an implementation of > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Block-Max WAND[5] which, once > >> > combined, allow to run queries faster > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > when > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > total hit counts are not requested. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [1] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8116 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8116> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [2] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8020 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8020> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [3] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8007 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8007> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [4] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4198 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4198> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [5] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8135 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8135> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > In terms of bug fixes, there is also a > >> > bad relevancy bug[6] which is > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > only in > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > 8.0 because it required a breaking > >> > change[7] to be implemented. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [6] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8031 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8031> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [7] > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8134 > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8134> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > As usual, doing a new major release > >> > will also help age out old codecs, > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > which > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > in-turn make maintenance easier: 8.0 > >> > will no longer need to care about > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > the > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > fact that some codecs were initially > >> > implemented with a random-access > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > API > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > for doc values, that pre-7.0 indices > >> > encoded norms differently, or that > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > pre-6.2 indices could not record an > >> > index sort. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > I also expect that we will come up > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > with > >> > ideas of things to do for 8.0 > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > as we > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > feel that the next major is getting > >> > closer. In terms of planning, I was > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > thinking that we could target > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > something > >> > like october 2018, which would > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > be > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > 12-13 months after 7.0 and 3-4 months > >> > from now. > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > From a Solr perspective, the main > >> > change I'm aware of that would be > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > worth > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > releasing a new major is the Star > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Burst > >> > effort. Is it something we want > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > to > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > get in for 8.0? > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Adrien > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> > --------------- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- > >> > unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- > >> > h...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- > >> > ---------- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- > >> > unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- > >> > h...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> -- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, > >> > Developer, Author, Speaker > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> > >> > | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >> > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > - > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- > >> > unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- > >> > h...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > -- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, > >> > Author, Speaker > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: > >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >> > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- > >> > unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- > >> > h...@lucene.apache.org <mailto:h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > >> > >> >> >>> -- > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> Nicholas Knize, Ph.D., GISP > >> > >> >> >>> Geospatial Software Guy | Elasticsearch > >> > >> >> >>> Apache Lucene Committer > >> > >> >> >>> nkn...@apache.org <mailto:nkn...@apache.org> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> -- > >> > >> >> >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, > >> > Speaker > >> > >> >> >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > >> > >> >> >> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: > >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >> > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> > >> >> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> > >> >> <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Adrien > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> > >> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> > >> <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker > >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > >> > >> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: > >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >> > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker > >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > >> > >> <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: > >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >> > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Adrien > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> > <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> > <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> > >> > > > > > > -- > > http://www.the111shift.com <http://www.the111shift.com/> > > > > -- > Adrien > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> > > > > -- > http://www.the111shift.com <http://www.the111shift.com/>
