Lucene 10.6.0 is now released. We agreed that there won't be a 10.7, and we are ready to start planning the 11.0 release. Here is my update about it.
We made progress on some of the open issues that I previously mentioned in this thread: - We lowered the minimum supported version to 9: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16741 . - There's a final PR open around the removal of the deprecated search(Query, Collector): https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16805. The last usages are in the join module. Join benchmarks (https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16858) were just merged to support the transition. Thanks MikeS and Mikhail for taking this on, sounds like this is going to be completed soon. - we decommissioned branch_10x. The main branch is now 12.0. branch_11x is our stable release branch (upcoming 11.0). There's a number of PRs still open with 11.0 milestone: it does not seem like any of these is strictly required for the 11.0 release. Please have a look: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aopen+milestone%3A11.0.0 . I am thinking these can all be pushed to 11.1. If there's other PRs that are worth including, please bring it up in this thread. Out of the issues that are left open with milestone 11.0 (https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues?q=is%3Aissue+state%3Aopen+milestone%3A11.0): - some folks have expressed interest for data-blind scalar quantization (https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/16029). I could not find any in-flight work around it. I would not hold the release for this unless we see progress in the next week or two. - we should take a pass at the leftover deprecations that can be removed: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/16918. There were already several PRs merged this week around this, great to see progress, we will be able to soon close this issue. - code that we would like to deprecate for 11.0: https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/16820 . Nice to have, we can do so also once 11.0 is released though? We opened this issue while discussing at Community over code, but it does not seem like any of us actually started working on this yet. - there is a PR up to remove the current limitation around the maximum number of docs in an index: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16847 . It is a broad sweeping change that touches many files. It's the kind of change that is great to include in a new major release and brings great value. If it does not make 11.0, it has to wait for the next major release. Shall we get more eyes on it and try to get it in? Here is my +1. Aside from the outstanding items above, we are organizing a broader Elasticsearch benchmarking effort against Lucene 11.0 to get early feedback around performance, similar to what we have done for the 10.0 release. For 10.0, the feedback came while releases were being cut, which caused 4 respins and some release management stress. We'd like to share results before cutting release candidates this time, to avoid later surprises. We are working on it, we will need a few weeks to complete this effort, analyze and share results. I will get back to this thread in a week or two with another update on 11.0 release prep. Cheers Luca On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 3:34 PM Houston Putman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mike, > > Sorry for the delay. I'll get a 10.6 RC spun up after CoC, but get that > process started now. > > - Houston > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 1:44 AM Ankur Goel <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hello Folks, >> If it's not too late, I'd like to include following PRs in >> the 11.0 release >> (Merged) PR #16705: Prefetch full precision vectors for >> rescoring >> (Pending Review) PR #16771: Page align vector data for all encodings >> (Open) PR #16145: Delay and cap prefetch backoff in >> MemorySegmentIndexInput >> >> The PR pending review is a small change that needs a second pair of eyes >> before it can be merged. >> I'd request another Lucene committer to take a look. >> >> The open PR is where I have provided all my inputs and it needs only a minor >> change IMHO. >> These changes are critical to improving Lucene's Vector search performance >> on larger >> than main memory indices. >> >> More improvements are on the way and I'd appreciate any suggestions >> from the community that could help me iterate fast and land them quickly. >> >> Thanks >> Ankur >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 9:38 PM Rahul Goswami <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Luca, thanks for the welcome change in >>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16741 to have Lucene 11 support >>> version 9 indexes. >>> I took a look and had a couple of comments for when you get a chance. >>> Otherwise looks ripe for merging. >>> >>> Best, >>> Rahul >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 8:48 AM Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Re: 10.6; Thanks for volunteering, Kaival, I guess we need a PMC >>>> member to drive it. Houston did you want to pick this up? In my >>>> opinion the issues tagged with 10.6 aren't active or urgent for the >>>> most part, so we should feel free to set a date not too far in the >>>> future (like next week). Maybe CoC intrudes, or maybe we get it done >>>> at the hackathon there :) If you're too busy, I can pick it up. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 7:36 AM Luca Cavanna <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hi all, >>>> > I made some progress on expanding the migrate guide >>>> > (https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16756 , now merged) and >>>> > addressing comments on the data compatibility changes I proposed at >>>> > https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16741 . I'd like to merge the >>>> > latter, feedback is welcome! Thanks to the folks that have already >>>> > reviewed it. To make it easier to follow: the proposal is to fully >>>> > support 9.x indices in Lucene 11, going to ship in the coming days if >>>> > there's no objections! >>>> > >>>> > I made some (rather slow) progress on removing the last deprecated >>>> > usages of search(Query, Collector), issue at >>>> > https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues/12892 : I believe we have 3 >>>> > join related PRs to go and the final removal at the end once all >>>> > usages are gone. I need a few weeks to take this to the finish line. >>>> > Help is welcome, I am not an expert on join related code. >>>> > >>>> > Most of the remaining PRs marked with milestone 11 are not super >>>> > recent: >>>> > https://github.com/apache/lucene/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aopen+milestone%3A11.0.0 >>>> > . If you're the author of one of these, could you bring it up-to-date, >>>> > get reviews and merge it? >>>> > >>>> > There's also data blind scalar quantization listed among the issues at >>>> > https://github.com/apache/lucene/issues?q=is%3Aissue+state%3Aopen+milestone%3A11.0.0 >>>> > . If we want to get that in, I suppose we need to start working on it >>>> > if we haven't yet. Otherwise push it to 12. >>>> > >>>> > Cheers >>>> > Luca >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Thu, Oct 1, 2026 at 1:24 PM Abhinav <[email protected]> >>>> > wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > Hey everyone, >>>> > > >>>> > > I am interested in helping you guys for 10.6 and 11.0 releases >>>> > > candidates. >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2026, 1:08 PM Luca Cavanna <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Hey all, >>>> > >> I agree with releasing 10.6 first. I kind of assumed that we would do >>>> > >> that, given that a major normally requires a bit more preparation. I >>>> > >> see there's a separate thread for 10.6 now, that's great. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Meanwhile, thanks for relabelling those PRs Michael! Let's continue >>>> > >> discussing changes that should be included in 11 in this thread. I >>>> > >> would give that a few weeks, at least until 10.6 is out. At that point >>>> > >> we should have a clearer picture of what's left to do and how long we >>>> > >> need to be ready to start the release. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> I am going to double check the migrate guide and see what may be >>>> > >> missing there. Also, I will ask for reviews on changes needed to >>>> > >> remove search(Query, Collector) (first item from my list above). We >>>> > >> are only a couple of PRs away, hopefully! >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Most importantly, I am looking for feedback on the proposal to lower >>>> > >> the minimum supported version to 9, see PR at >>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16741 . Comments on the PR are >>>> > >> welcome. I can also open a separate thread for that if it helps. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Cheers >>>> > >> Luca >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:02 PM Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> >>>> > >> wrote: >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > BTW I am spinning up a 10.5.2 RC2 although it may be a bit >>>> > >> > underutilized, we'll see >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 4:18 PM Kaival Parikh <[email protected]> >>>> > >> > wrote: >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > Thanks Mike / Robert, that makes sense to me! >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > I started a thread about the 10.6 release >>>> > >> > > (https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0w3dmwbt1tn00tb9p28wf55nj9qys77v). >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > Oh, as I'm writing this, I see another volunteer for the 10.6 >>>> > >> > > release :) >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > On 2026/09/29 19:23:54 Michael Sokolov wrote: >>>> > >> > > > That's fair - maybe we can have two people work in parallel on >>>> > >> > > > the two >>>> > >> > > > releases?? >>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 3:19 PM Robert Muir <[email protected]> >>>> > >> > > > wrote: >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > The 10.6.0 features already look quite big: its got new >>>> > >> > > > > incremental >>>> > >> > > > > update facilities and all kinds of stuff. I really don't want >>>> > >> > > > > to >>>> > >> > > > > derail or delay 11.0 as I think we should get it out too! But >>>> > >> > > > > maybe we >>>> > >> > > > > could get out a 10.6 in a shorter time while we tidy up for >>>> > >> > > > > 11.0? >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:52 PM Michael Sokolov >>>> > >> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > Oh, good point - there are a bunch of issues there! (in >>>> > >> > > > > > 10.6.0 >>>> > >> > > > > > milestone). I guess we should go through those as well to >>>> > >> > > > > > determine >>>> > >> > > > > > which will be in scope. Eventually we'll have to just set >>>> > >> > > > > > a deadline, >>>> > >> > > > > > but maybe there are some there we can deprioritize? >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:40 PM Kaival Parikh >>>> > >> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > Thanks for starting this thread! >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > I was interested in some vector search features coming >>>> > >> > > > > > > out in Lucene 11, and was also curious about the release >>>> > >> > > > > > > process (old thread for Lucene 11: >>>> > >> > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c8sjqg0t79zzo06j6wj3pvhdlg5wph34) >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > I'm also happy to contribute to the release process in >>>> > >> > > > > > > any way I can! >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > Q: if Lucene 11 is the next release, should we also >>>> > >> > > > > > > consider things in milestone 10.6.0 >>>> > >> > > > > > > (https://github.com/apache/lucene/milestone/37)? >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > On 2026-09-28 21:15 UTC Michael Sokolov via dev wrote: >>>> > >> > > > > > > > I'd like to restart the release thread. Kaival, I think >>>> > >> > > > > > > > you had volunteered to be a RM? But we need to figure >>>> > >> > > > > > > > out what to include. Things are moving pretty fast at >>>> > >> > > > > > > > the moment, it seems to me from the mailing list >>>> > >> > > > > > > > anyway. But it's a little hard to see which issues are >>>> > >> > > > > > > > close and should be included. There are 32 open PR's >>>> > >> > > > > > > > tagged with milestone=11.0; however all but two are >>>> > >> > > > > > > > marked "Stale". I think we should ignore the Stale ones >>>> > >> > > > > > > > by default. Of the two other ones: one is >>>> > >> > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16034, which >>>> > >> > > > > > > > really should be marked Stale since nobody has >>>> > >> > > > > > > > commented since May (and it makes me doubt the Stale >>>> > >> > > > > > > > tagging, actually). So this list may not indicate the >>>> > >> > > > > > > > issues folks truly want to get target for 11.0. >>>> > >> > > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > > I want to suggest that we go through and "untag" all >>>> > >> > > > > > > > the issues marked with 11.0 and have a period of a >>>> > >> > > > > > > > couple of days where committers can tag issues they >>>> > >> > > > > > > > want to see included. Other contributors should please >>>> > >> > > > > > > > refrain, but feel free to start a discussion on the >>>> > >> > > > > > > > mailing list if there is an open issue under active >>>> > >> > > > > > > > development that you feel is worth holding a release up >>>> > >> > > > > > > > for. If that makes sense, I can do the untagging. >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >>>> > >> > > > > > > [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > > >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> >>>> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >> >>>> > >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> > >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
