Both the solr-orbit and solr-orbit-workloads repositories are created and initialized with WIP code.
I have enabled GH issues for both repos and added some initial issues - https://github.com/apache/solr-orbit/issues - https://github.com/apache/solr-orbit-workloads/issues The ubmrella incubation JIRA is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-18253 Feel free to jump in and contribute anywhere you like. Jan > 21. mai 2026 kl. 19:58 skrev Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>: > > The VOTE thread has passed. > > I'll continue provisioning the solr-orbit and solr-orbit-workloads git > repositories and push the baseline code. > We can then create a JIRA umbrella and sub tasks for all the other tasks > needed. > > Jan > >> 1. mai 2026 kl. 15:37 skrev Eric Pugh <[email protected]>: >> >> I want to share with the community that earlier this week I had the >> opportunity to visit Kevin and team and talk about Solr Orbit fitting thier >> specific use case, and I think we have consensus that this solution is how >> we want to move forward. I know it will solve my client's needs as well. >> >> I checked in with Jan, and I think the next step is to get a vote thread on >> bringing in this codebase as a `solr-orbit` subproject. >> >> On 2026/04/23 20:42:30 Eric Pugh wrote: >>> Home after some travel... >>> >>> I think the solr-benchmark-game needs a bit more marinating to see the true >>> value. Also, Kevin and (???) did some great analysis on it and pointed >>> out some big weaknesses to it's approach. >>> >>> I'm onboard with the solr-orbit plan, and can see how I would use it with >>> my client to establish the benchmarks needed. >>> >>> On 2026/04/17 20:38:17 "Kevin Liang (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) via dev" wrote: >>>> "Solr Orbit" seems a fine name to me. >>>> >>>> Re: David's point on picking one of search-benchmark-game vs. >>>> solr-benchmark-fork >>>> >>>> I'll add my opinion as I've used / made code changes to both and have >>>> provided this feedback to Eric / Jan. >>>> >>>> The search-benchmark-game is nice for its simplicity and results >>>> presentation. It can quickly give you some data points between two >>>> versions of software. That being said, at best it seems geared more >>>> towards assessing a library (lucene) than a full distributed system >>>> (solr). Its feature set is limited and the methodology for executing >>>> queries / drawing statistical conclusions leaves something to be desired >>>> (can expand in detail if anyone wants to hear). >>>> >>>> In contrast, solr-benchmark (OSB fork) is building off a feature set >>>> constructed over the better part of a decade. It's a much larger codebase >>>> and a more mature benchmarking framework with much greater capability to >>>> do different kinds of performance test workloads. >>>> >>>> Personally I would go with solr-benchmark. Building a web interface on top >>>> (or hooking up a jenkins build pipeline) can be done. And like we said in >>>> the meeting, just getting people to run the tool independently and >>>> publishing their results, even as plain text on the wiki, would be a good >>>> first step win. >>>> >>>> From: [email protected] At: 04/16/26 13:00:14 UTC-4:00To: >>>> [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Solr Performance Benchmarking Discussion Page >>>> >>>> It's not work using Elastic Inc's trademark "Rally" if we can avoid it. >>>> They >>>> are known to pursue such violations. And I believe it is a violation of >>>> the >>>> Apache license too. I like "Solr Orbit" :) >>>> >>>> I'll wait some time to let all voices be heard wrt the various tools and >>>> which >>>> to pick going forward, then if everyone rallies (pun intended) around >>>> solr-benchmark, then we can proceed. >>>> >>>> Jan >>>> >>>>> 16. apr. 2026 kl. 14:36 skrev David Smiley <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> Why avoid the word "Rally" if that's its foundation/lineage? If we >>>>> want to avoid risk of using that word, then we simply ask >>>>> ElasticSearch with our proposed name for our fork that includes that >>>>> word. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 3:37 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for presenting the solr-benchmark tool on the community meetup >>>> yesterday Kevin. >>>>>> I'll encourage others to take it for a spin. There are rough edges but >>>>>> you >>>> should be able to get some results. >>>>>> >>>>>> We also discussed the potential for moving the tool from my github space >>>>>> to >>>> asf. >>>>>> That would make it easier for the community to contribute and >>>>>> collaborate. >>>> But it requires 2-3 PMC members interested in being maintainers. >>>>>> If we make it an asf repo, David noted that we are not required to >>>>>> publish >>>> official releases until we feel compelled to do so. >>>>>> Also, David noted the naming collision with the internal solr-benchmark >>>> module. How about "solr-orbit", which is a homage to "Rally" (orbiting the >>>> race >>>> track) but in our Solar-system universe :) >>>>>> >>>>>> As a next step I'll start a VOTE thread for accepting the two repos into >>>> ASF. The results of the VOTE will guide further action. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jan >>>>>> >>>>>>> 8. mars 2026 kl. 20:42 skrev Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I read through the benchmarking wiki page today. It was well written, >>>> thanks Kevin for reviving this effort, and in such a structured way! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There's a renewed energy around benchmarking, and more tooling options >>>>>>> than >>>> ever. So to add to the mix I'm presenting yet another one 🤣🤣, "Solr >>>> Benchmark": >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://github.com/janhoy/solr-benchmark >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You may quickly notice that this looks familiar. And yes, it is a >>>>>>> fork/port >>>> of Rally/OpensearchBenchmark, ported to provision and benchmark Solr >>>> clusters, >>>> using the same datasets and "workload"s as those tools. >>>>>>> I first tried to start a fork 2 or 3 years ago but it stranded. I made a >>>> new effort using LLM agents and this first working version was prepared in >>>> a >>>> few afternoons. >>>>>>> Even if the foundation is solid and proven over many years, this initial >>>> port is not complete, view it as a MVP and WIP. Only one workload / >>>> dataset is >>>> ported so far. Take it for a spin... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll defer to Kevin to add it to the tools list of the wiki and continue >>>> the analysis effort with this as one of the contenders. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jan >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. mars 2026 kl. 17:13 skrev Kevin Liang (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) >>>> <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Given the recent interest and discussion around Solr performance >>>> benchmarking, I figured it would be useful to 1) centralize the discussion >>>> and >>>> 2) bring it to a long-lived format (that's not email). So with that, I >>>> have >>>> started >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/Solr+Performance+Benchmarking >>>> >>>> (I figured there's still more discussion to be had before it becomes a SIP >>>> with >>>> technical requirements). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I encourage anyone and everyone who is interested to provide their >>>>>>>> input >>>> (comment or edit). This is a community initiative, and shouldn't be >>>> limited by >>>> me or any biases I may have. Hopefully people find this useful in moving >>>> the >>>> discussion forward. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Kevin >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> 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]
