Yeah we can back port the Lucene part to 1.x Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 8, 2016, at 11:15 PM, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> wrote: > > yeah there's no reason we can't diff the branch and merge it into 1.0 as > well >> On 9 Jul 2016 00:26, "Chris Mattmann" <mattm...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> awesome!!! >> >> Please backport to 1.x :) >> >> >> >> >>> On 7/8/16, 3:01 PM, "Tom Barber" <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> wrote: >>> >>> There you go, running commentary over. The filemanager test suite now >>> passes on Lucene 6, I'll fix up the rest next week. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Better than I thought actually: >>>> >>>> Tests in error: >>>> TestLuceneQueryCliAction.testClientTransTrueAndFlatProduct:78 » >>>> CmdLineAction ... >>>> TestFileManagerCli.testLuceneQuery:350 » Runtime >>>> org.apache.oodt.cas.cli.excep... >>>> >>>> Tests run: 221, Failures: 1, Errors: 2, Skipped: 0 >>>> >>>> The failure is actually one Avro. So only 2 failing on lucene 6 in the >> FM. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Just FYI: >>>>> >>>>> Doesn't work yet, but I've pushed a lucene branch which is based on 2.0 >>>>> and upgrades lucene to 6.1.0. LuceneCatalog in filemanager has been 75% >>>>> (guess) converted and tests are half passing. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < >>>>> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> ACK >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Once avro_rpc is stable, I suggest we rename the branch 2.0-dev or >>>>>> similar >>>>>>> then branch the branch to uprade solr and lucene outside of that >> scope >>>>>> so >>>>>>> we don't destroy the semi working avro upgrades ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi >>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Coolio! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Chris Mattmann < >> mattm...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes I was just telling Paul R. the other day we need to do >>>>>>>>> this, or we’re DOA. I’ve first hand seen the scalability >>>>>>>>> issues with Big Translate and DRAT using the old Lucene >>>>>>>>> library. Let’s get it fixed in 2.x. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/16, 8:51 AM, "Tom Barber" <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi> >> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just throwing this one out there as we're making a bunch of >>>>>> breaking >>>>>>>>>> changes in 2.0. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Is it worth upgrading Lucene and Solr versions within OODT? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> My feeling is that they are both pretty old and whilst we're >> making >>>>>>> life >>>>>>>>>> hard for everyone we might as well go the whole hog and drag >> them >>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> 21st century, but I'm interested in others opinions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Chris you have a much better understand about those things than >>>>>> myself. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tom >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> *Lewis* >> >>
