FWIW I believe both issues have patches now... I haven't tested anything yet though.
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 4:03 PM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi. > > With the current five +1's and two -1's I'm not seeing the kind of > consensus we traditionally want for a release. > It's understandable due the uncertainty caused by the two bugs uncovered > during the vote. > The important question is whether the majority of us deem any of these > bugs as release blockers. > > Before I conclude the vote (tomorrow), I'll allow time for more votes to > be cast (or changed in either direction), taking the latest insight into > account.. > > Jan > > 2. mai 2022 kl. 21:40 skrev Joel Bernstein <[email protected]>: > > It would be a pretty odd edge case. The enum method would typically not be > used in high cardinality cases and limit:-1 means an overrequest is not > needed. I personally don't think this is a blocker. > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 12:43 PM Michael Gibney <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Gus said most of what I have to say -- this affects an odd edge case: >> explicit positive overrequest _and_ method:enum _and_ limit:-1. This would >> be a pretty pathological combination; but even so, the consequence would be >> to turn an unlimited (limit:-1) request into a limited one (limit:n, n>=0) >> -- it would not be subtle in how that would manifest. So I'll retract my >> earlier statement ("I'd be surprised if this turns out to be a blocker for >> 9.0"). >> >> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:45 AM Gus Heck <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Also this changes my vote to -1 >>> >>> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:44 AM Gus Heck <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Some offline discussion indicates that this is more than just SKG and >>>> it looks like Michael will look into it, so I've filed >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16176 as a blocker and >>>> assigned to him. >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:03 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Tried some seeds from Jenkins failures for this same test, and found >>>>> another reproducible seed: 19DF63E9537FFBA3 >>>>> >>>>> On the face of it, it seems like a corner case bug, but could of >>>>> course be a generic enum JSON Facet bug that has lived with us for some >>>>> time? >>>>> I'll wait a bit more to gather more insight on this. >>>>> Gus, have you created a JIRA? >>>>> >>>>> Jan >>>>> >>>>> 2. mai 2022 kl. 16:01 skrev Gus Heck <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I was hoping someone more familiar with SKG's test/code that I found a >>>>> failure for might chime in. It looks like it's a case where enum facets >>>>> are >>>>> not producing all results produced for default faceting, which seems >>>>> possibly bad, but I am not familiar with this code at all. This probably >>>>> is >>>>> localized to Semantic Knowledge Graphs (which after some digging is what >>>>> SKG stands for... be nice if that were in the comments for the class)... >>>>> so >>>>> the question is do we want to release with a known break in that feature I >>>>> guess. I'm inclined to say no, but I am certainly not going to be able >>>>> to dig into SKG's to fix this in a timely fashion. So I guess the question >>>>> is is SKG important enough to someone out there to fix it soon? >>>>> >>>>> Also looks like the code iterates across possible parameter values and >>>>> fails on the first one to go wrong so there may be other failure cases for >>>>> STREAM or SMART hiding behind this... >>>>> >>>>> -Gus >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 6:55 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> If I close the vote now, it will technically pass with four +1s, one >>>>>> -1 and one -0. A bit too fragile result IMO. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would too like to understand the severity of the configsets bug, >>>>>> and whether it is serious enough to stop the release. >>>>>> As I understand the issue, it ONLY affects those creating a new >>>>>> configset based on another one in ZK. >>>>>> I.e. there are many workarounds for this bug >>>>>> - Use an authenticated user when creating configset (and not an >>>>>> "untrusted" one) >>>>>> - Upload a new configset rather than basing it on an existing? >>>>>> - Upload configset directly to Zookeeper >>>>>> >>>>>> Please verify or shoot down my assumption. If my assumption is >>>>>> correct, I'll keep my +1 vote, and wait for a few more +1s before closing >>>>>> the vote. If the issue is indeed more serious and there are more -1's, >>>>>> I'll >>>>>> happily respin after the fix. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 29. apr. 2022 kl. 21:03 skrev Gus Heck <[email protected]>: >>>>>> >>>>>> -0 for now, pending discussion of severity... I have hit a >>>>>> reproducing failure: >>>>>> >>>>>> ./gradlew :solr:core:test --tests >>>>>> "org.apache.solr.search.facet.TestCloudJSONFacetSKGEquiv.testRandom" >>>>>> -Ptests.jvms=5 -Ptests.jvmargs=-XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1 >>>>>> -Ptests.seed=C730F33909C71234 -Ptests.badapples=false >>>>>> -Ptests.file.encoding=UTF-8 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 1:28 PM Kevin Risden <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Smoketester passed on the second try for me: SUCCESS! >>>>>>> [1:29:24.214674] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The first failure was "gradlew :solr:core:test --tests >>>>>>> "org.apache.solr.cloud.HttpPartitionOnCommitTest.test" -Ptests.jvms=4 >>>>>>> -Ptests.jvmargs=-XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1 -Ptests.seed=66730F3AEF630DB6 >>>>>>> -Ptests.badapples=false -Ptests.file.encoding=US-ASCII". I haven't >>>>>>> reproduced it yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However it looks like the configsets API is broken with one of the >>>>>>> simpler examples. Eric Pugh found this the other day and asked me to >>>>>>> check on 9.0 RC4: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16164 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm still poking around the release today. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Based on the configset api error - I'm -1 for releasing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kevin Risden >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 11:26 AM Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Smoketester succeeded with Java 11 and Java 17 -- SUCCESS! >>>>>>>> [2:04:03.678208] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unlike for some others, this succeeded on my first try. I guess I'm >>>>>>>> just lucky :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tested building an application that uses EmbeddedSolrServer and >>>>>>>> depends on our maven artifacts - validated SOLR-16157, SOLR-16117 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tested a mixed state cluster with 8.11.1 and 9.0.0 nodes (no >>>>>>>> security). Queries worked as expected. >>>>>>>> Tested a rolling upgrade from 8.11.1 to 9.0.0 with basic >>>>>>>> authentication enabled. Queries failed (as expected) at first, but then >>>>>>>> succeeded when setting solr.pki.sendVersion=v1 and >>>>>>>> solr.pki.acceptVersions=v1,v2on the Solr 9 node, as described in >>>>>>>> our ref guide and upgrade notes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Manually checked for license headers in source release, missing >>>>>>>> headers on the following: >>>>>>>> * SYSTEM_REQUIREMENTS.md >>>>>>>> * solr/core/src/resources/SystemCollection*.xml >>>>>>>> * lots and lots of stuff under solr-ref-guide, unclear which pieces >>>>>>>> of this are our code and which are copied from external sources. >>>>>>>> * modules/*/README.md >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Will file a follow up JIRA for the license issues. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 8:15 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please vote for release candidate 4 for Solr 9.0.0 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded from: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/solr/solr-9.0.0-RC4-rev-d6e36d590896755ca962c6d2ddedf78ca4f463cc >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/solr/solr-9.0.0-RC4-rev-d6e36d590896755ca962c6d2ddedf78ca4f463cc >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are encouraged to do an extra thorough test and manual >>>>>>>>> inspection beyond >>>>>>>>> running the smoketester, since this is a major release. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You can build a release-candidate of the official docker image >>>>>>>>> using the following command: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DIST_BASE=https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/solr && \ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> RC_FOLDER=solr-9.0.0-RC4-rev-d6e36d590896755ca962c6d2ddedf78ca4f463cc >>>>>>>>> && \ >>>>>>>>> docker build >>>>>>>>> $DIST_BASE/$RC_FOLDER/solr/docker/Dockerfile.official \ >>>>>>>>> --build-arg >>>>>>>>> SOLR_DOWNLOAD_URL=$DIST_BASE/$RC_FOLDER/solr/solr-9.0.0.tgz \ >>>>>>>>> -t solr-rc:9.0.0-4 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours i.e. until 2022-04-30 >>>>>>>>> 13:00 UTC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 approve >>>>>>>>> [ ] +0 no opinion >>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> SUCCESS! [0:56:56.134141] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >>>>>> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >>>>> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >>>> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >>> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >>> >> > -- http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) http://www.the111shift.com (play)
