Re: Old programmers do fade away

Your presence on the user mailing list will be sorely missed. You've been an invaluable source of good advice for years. I owe you at least $bignum beers. Best of luck with the squirrel problem (they are rather tasty) and any other fun projects! Take care, and thank you, - Bram

versions = true in SolrCloud (SOLR-8733)

Hey folks, Been taking a look at SOLR-8733. Basically the versions=true param doesn't work in SolrCloud unless you manage to direct each update to the leader. The docs don't mention that this is broken in SolrCloud, and according to Jira it seems like @yonik never intended this to be a public

Re: [DISCUSS] Cross Data-Center Replication in Apache Solr

We've had some experience with this. As per usual, customers tend to want the holy grail: no data loss when one data centre blows up, but no increased latency when updating data. This then somehow, magically, has to work over a slow uplink between two data centres without saturating the link.

Re: Thinking about upgrading indexes to X+2

On 20/11/2020 19:18, Uwe Schindler wrote: > Thanks for bringing this again. > > I tend to say: Let us just allow also IndexUpgrader beyodn 2 versions! If > somebody complains about incorrect offsets, oh man - It's their problem. Is there any particular reason why the IndexUpgrader couldn't

Re: timeAllowed NPE and possible patch

On 19/08/2020 16:11, David Smiley wrote: > Please file a JIRA issue.  Also mention which version of JIRA you use > for the "Affects version". Thanks. Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14758 and added a patch. - Bram

timeAllowed NPE and possible patch

Hey folks, I would occasionally bump into an NPE in QueryComponent.mergeIds when using timeAllowed. Here's a little patch which seems to fix the issue. I suspect sortFieldValues can be null depending on when the query execution is aborted? - Bram diff --git

SOLR-14413 - timeAllowed/cursorMark

Hey folks, Someone submitted a patch for SOLR-14413 which allows timeAllowed to work in conjunction with cursor marks. There's a patch in Jira and a PR (#1436) on github, but it looks like it hasn't been merged. Is there anything I can do to help get this merged? Or are there any fundamental

Re: SolrClient and making requests asynchronously

> public CompletableFuture> requestAsync(SolrRequest request); NamedList aside, this looks like a great async API to me. But I would still like some control over the thread pool/executor that's being used. Maybe that doesn't have to be part of the requestAysnc method signature, maybe it could be

Re: clue

This looks great! I'm assuming that the 8.5.0 in the release name indicates that this will only work with Lucene 8.5.0 indexes? On 10/06/2020 20:15, John Wang wrote: > Hi folks: > > A while ago I wrote a tool to manage a Lucene > index: https://github.com/javasoze/clue. > > If there is any

Re: StringBuffer usage

On 06/06/2020 22:48, Erick Erickson wrote: > When is there a good reason to use StringBuffer rather than StringBuilder? > While going through some of the warnings I happened to run across a few of > these. I haven’t changed them, and at least one (AuditEvent) has a comment > about back-compat

Re: [DISCUSS] Lucene-Solr split (Solr promoted to TLP)

On 11/05/2020 15:09, Dawid Weiss wrote: >> Maybe I'm alone in this, but (better) Lucene compatibility is one of the >> reasons why our company chose Solr over ElasticSearch. > > I fail to see anything supporting superior Lucene > compatibility of one vs. another. Yeah you're right. It's since

Re: [DISCUSS] Lucene-Solr split (Solr promoted to TLP)

On 10/05/2020 08:20, David Smiley wrote: > An idea just occurred to me that may help make a split nicer for Solr > than it is today.  Solr could use a branch of the Lucene project that's > used for the Solr project. Maybe I'm alone in this, but (better) Lucene compatibility is one of the reasons

Re: [DISCUSS] Lucene-Solr split (Solr promoted to TLP)

> The big question is this: “Is this the right time to split Solr and > Lucene into two independent projects?”. Sounds like there are quite a few tasks to complete to get this done. Splitting the build and codebase. Presumably a bunch of administration within Apache/the PMC. Setting up

Re: Fwd: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Lucene 7.7.3 released

Thanks all, for making this release, much appreciated! On 04/05/2020 15:16, Noble Paul wrote: > > > -- Forwarded message - > From: *Noble Paul* mailto:no...@apache.org>> > Date: Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 4:51 PM > Subject: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Lucene 7.7.3 released > To:

Re: [DISCUSS] SIP-4 Solr should own the bootstrap process

On 24/03/2020 16:01, Jan Høydahl wrote: > It has been proposed many times to make Solr a truly standalone app and that > we should start Jetty from within Solr and not the other way around :) Do you see this running in a single JVM, i.e. you run solr.jar and it then starts an embedded Jetty

SolrJ: ZooKeeper status path & admin requests

Hey folks, SolrJ's CommonParams.java contains a list of URL paths which are admin requests (ADMIN_PATHS). Requests to these paths follow a different route in the (Cloud)SolrClient, one where they don't require a "collection" property. Which makes sense, after all System Info etc does not relate

Re: New Dev

> Will start with the docs as you suggested. To add to that, I recently created a "top ten" list of files that seem important and have no top level Javadoc. These might be a useful place to start. solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/core/CoreContainer.java

Re: Do we want to pursue an LTS designation?

On 15/11/2019 23:07, Erick Erickson wrote: > Andrzej Bailecki and I worked on something similar, it might be good to > compare notes. I gave a talk last Activate that might be useful for you to > look at for ideas. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaQBH_H3d3g Thanks, that sounds super useful!

Re: Do we want to pursue an LTS designation?

On 15/11/2019 19:14, Jörn Franke wrote: > Well sometimes even reindexing might not always be avoidable when upgrading. > However, there should be a more user friendly way. Not every Solr deployment > that one might inherit has foreseen this. Eg in case Solr is used as a NoSQL > database where

Re: Do we want to pursue an LTS designation?

On 13/11/2019 20:36, Erick Erickson wrote: > I have zero interest in having an LTS “policy” that requires any further > commitment of my personal time to random people who ask for it but aren’t > willing to pay. I consider my non-paid work to Solr a _volunteer_ activity, > not something anyone

Missing top level javadocs

David Smiley mentioned this in the "SolrCloud is sick" thread. Instead of hijacking that, I figured I'd start another thread. On 03/11/2019 05:32, David Smiley wrote: > requiring javadocs on all top level classes.  I think more javadocs and > code comments would be very helpful -- especially for

Re: SolrCloud is sick.

> SolrCloud is sick right now. The way low level Zookeeper is handeled On an unrelated project, I've stopped using "raw" ZK client access and have switched to Curator. The API is a fair bit easier to work with, and it results in less ugly code. I realize that this won't go very far in resolving

Re: Renaming SolrCloud

On 20/10/2019 01:32, Noble Paul wrote: > A standalone mode should be nothing but a SolrCloud setup with an > embedded ZK and a single node. From an operations point of view, I disagree. ZK is another process to monitor, another process which can fail, another process which exposes various

Re: cwiki write access

believe you need to create an account first. ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:15 PM Bram Van Dam mailto:bram.van...@intix.eu>> wrote: Hey folks, I'd like to request write access to the Solr cwiki. Mostl

cwiki write access

Hey folks, I'd like to request write access to the Solr cwiki. Mostly so I can correct the odd typo as I see them. Thanks, - Bram

Re: Can we change forceMerge to not need as much disk space?

On 02/09/2019 17:19, Erick Erickson wrote: > 4> Don’t quite know what to do if maxSegments is 1 (or other very low number). Having maxSegments set to > 5 (or whatever) seems like an acceptable constraint if it enables optimize without 200% disk usage. > Something like this would also pave the

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Solr 7.7.2 released

On 05/06/2019 16:26, Jan Høydahl wrote: > 4 June 2019, Apache Solr™ 7.7.2 available Thanks for making this happen, Jan, much appreciated! - Bram

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 7.7.2 RC1

I don't get a vote, but smoke tests pass for me. On 29/05/2019 01:54, Jan Høydahl wrote: > Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene/Solr 7.7.2 > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: >

Re: 7.7.2?

On 29/04/2019 23:33, Jan Høydahl wrote: > I'll vounteer as RM for 7.7.2 and aim at first RC on Tuesday May 7th Thank you!

7.7.2?

Hey folks, Was anyone planning on releasing 7.7.2? It seems like there are quite a few bug fixes, including the one with the high CPU usage. Full list of fixes so far: SOLR-13414, SOLR-13409, SOLR-13408, SOLR-13392, SOLR-13355, SOLR-13349, SOLR-13344, SOLR-13285, SOLR-13281, SOLR-13234,

Re: We have a cause for high CPU usage on Solr 7.7

On 25/03/2019 17:04, Erick Erickson wrote: > Short form: Apparently there’s a java 8 bug that’s the root cause, not fixed > until Java 9: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129861 Thanks for this, Erick & Adam. This explains a few things I've been seeing (in my own code as well as

[jira] [Created] (SOLR-13247) Incorrect shard placement during Collection creation

Bram Van Dam created SOLR-13247: --- Summary: Incorrect shard placement during Collection creation Key: SOLR-13247 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13247 Project: Solr Issue Type

[jira] [Updated] (SOLR-13136) Queries fail during shard creation [testcase included]

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13136?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Bram Van Dam updated SOLR-13136: Issue Type: Bug (was: Improvement) > Queries fail during shard creation [testcase inclu

[jira] [Created] (SOLR-13136) Queries fail during shard creation [testcase included]

Bram Van Dam created SOLR-13136: --- Summary: Queries fail during shard creation [testcase included] Key: SOLR-13136 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13136 Project: Solr Issue Type

[jira] [Updated] (SOLR-12953) Support for TLS/SSL key alias configuration

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12953?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Bram Van Dam updated SOLR-12953: Fix Version/s: 7.6 > Support for TLS/SSL key alias configurat

Re: Lucene/Solr 7.6

On 02/11/2018 15:41, Nicholas Knize wrote: > If needed I can hold off on cutting the 7.6 branch and feature freezing > until Friday of next week. That would still give at least two weeks of > jenkins testing & bug fixing before a target release the last week of > November. If you're cutting 7.6

Re: Solr TLS/SSL key alias configuration (with patch to come)

On 31/10/2018 15:51, Erick Erickson wrote: > There's no reason I can imagine not to open a JIRA, > basically anyone willing to create a patch has my vote! Done: SOLR-12953 including a patch. Decided to do this on the 7_5 branch. Merges cleanly to master as well, but we're stickign to 7.5 for the

[jira] [Updated] (SOLR-12953) Support for TLS/SSL key alias configuration

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12953?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Bram Van Dam updated SOLR-12953: Description: As discussed on the mailing list: *Context:* There's a jetty-ssl.xml config file

[jira] [Created] (SOLR-12953) Support for TLS/SSL key alias configuration

Bram Van Dam created SOLR-12953: --- Summary: Support for TLS/SSL key alias configuration Key: SOLR-12953 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12953 Project: Solr Issue Type

Re: Solr TLS/SSL key alias configuration (with patch to come)

On 31/10/2018 15:51, Erick Erickson wrote: > Probably just add a note to the upgrade section of CHANGES.txt, > unless others disagree. I confess knowing very little about the > mechanics here. Thanks for the quick feedback. Will try to do this tomorrow. > BTW, don't know if you're familiar with

Solr TLS/SSL key alias configuration (with patch to come)

Hey folks, Context: There's a jetty-ssl.xml config file which configures Jetty's SslContextFactory using properties set in solr.in.sh, but it's incomplete for some purposes. Problem: I've noticed that no "certAlias" property is present. This means that when Jetty starts, it will pick an

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.5.5 RC2

On 23/10/17 17:43, Steve Rowe wrote: > I’ll go do the release now. Thanks! I missed the announcement, but I just noticed 5.5.5 appear in the changelogs. Much appreciated. - Bram - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: Solr JSON Facet API & aggregation functions documentation

On 19/06/17 17:38, Erick Erickson wrote: > We've recently gone to AsciiDoc which is much easier to edit IMO, and > also allows anyone (hint hint) to attach a patch to a JIRA for the > documentation that makes it into the next version of reference guide > as well as the current online version.

Solr JSON Facet API & aggregation functions documentation

Hey folks, Yonik's blog [1] contains a list of aggregation functions supported by the JSON Facet API (the json.facet parameter) butI can't seem to find documentation for these on the cwiki. There's an old TODO list on the cwiki which mentions that this still needs to happen. [2] Is anyone

Re: Stop using SHA-1 and MD5 hashes?

> From what I can see, hashes and signatures are both missing on the > download mirrors for Lucene and Solr. That's probably prudent for > hashes, but should signatures be there? I vaguely remembering raising this issue before -- though it might have been regarding a different Apache project.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Lucene 5.5.3 released

> 09 September 2016, Apache Lucene™ 5.5.3 available Thanks for creating the release, Anshum! - Bram - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-9035) New cwiki page: IndexUpgrader

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9035?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15336032#comment-15336032 ] Bram Van Dam commented on SOLR-9035: Thanks for creating it. What else is missing to create

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Lucene 5.5.1 released

On 06/05/16 08:46, Anshum Gupta wrote: > 5 May 2016, Apache Lucene™ 5.5.1 available Thanks for the hard work, Anshum! - Bram - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Schedule merges during off-peak hours?

On 02/05/16 16:04, Ryan Josal wrote: > I don't have a comment on whether or not it makes sense to have schedule > based merges, but I will say that search speed is impacted by segment > count, and if you're indexing constantly all day long, it's possible > that saving a merge until off peak hours

Can someone create this wiki page?

Could someone take a look at SOLR-9035 and either create the cwiki page or give me some feedback on the contents of the page? I'd do it myself but I don't have commit access :-) Thanks a bunch, - Bram - To unsubscribe,

Re: Schedule merges during off-peak hours?

On 02/05/16 06:45, Erick Erickson wrote: > If "commit intervals of around one minute" mean that you're taking 60 > seconds for the commit to finish, then perhaps it's the opposite and > you're autowarming too much. I usually start my autowarm counts > around 16 or so for filterCache and

Schedule merges during off-peak hours?

Hey folks, Disclaimer: I haven't given this too much thought, so feel free to shoot me down if this is a stupid idea. We have a lot of Solr instances with a lot of different customers, and most of them fit into a patterb of 9-5 searching and slow but steady addition of documents 24/7, at a rate

[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-9051) Read Solr 4.10 indexes from Solr 6.x

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9051?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15265289#comment-15265289 ] Bram Van Dam commented on SOLR-9051: [~ysee...@gmail.com] Are you considering rewriting the index

[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-9046) solr.cmd wrongly assumes Jetty will always listen on 0.0.0.0

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9046?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15261703#comment-15261703 ] Bram Van Dam commented on SOLR-9046: Thanks for these fixes and the commit. Just tested your changes

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.5.1

Hey Anshum, Can you have a look at SOLR-9046 as well? It's something that's been bugging me in 5.5. It's fine if it doesn't make it to 5.5.1, but it would be really nice if it did! Thx, - Bram - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

[jira] [Updated] (SOLR-9046) solr.cmd wrongly assumes Jetty will always listen on 0.0.0.0

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9046?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Bram Van Dam updated SOLR-9046: --- Attachment: SOLR-9045.patch > solr.cmd wrongly assumes Jetty will always listen on 0.0.

[jira] [Created] (SOLR-9046) solr.cmd wrongly assumes Jetty will always listen on 0.0.0.0

Bram Van Dam created SOLR-9046: -- Summary: solr.cmd wrongly assumes Jetty will always listen on 0.0.0.0 Key: SOLR-9046 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9046 Project: Solr Issue

Solr - Windows solr.cmd & network interfaces: weird behaviour

Hi folks, Just noticed some weird behaviour on Windows. The Windows solr.cmd script makes the (incorrect) assumption that Solr will always be listening on 0.0.0.0 (all interfaces). When you change the interface address, say to 127.0.0.1, then the status and stop commands will fail. I changed the

Re: Upgrading Solr - Wiki

On 21/04/16 14:05, Steve Rowe wrote: > Docs welcome! I've created a JIRA issue with the suggested content for an IndexUpgrader page. If someone can create the page, I'll leave comments on the other relevant pages so they can point to the new page. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9035

[jira] [Updated] (SOLR-9035) New cwiki page: IndexUpgrader

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9035?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Bram Van Dam updated SOLR-9035: --- Attachment: indexupgrader.html > New cwiki page: IndexUpgra

[jira] [Created] (SOLR-9035) New cwiki page: IndexUpgrader

Bram Van Dam created SOLR-9035: -- Summary: New cwiki page: IndexUpgrader Key: SOLR-9035 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9035 Project: Solr Issue Type: Improvement

Re: Anybody seeing Jira issue: unable to add comments

On 22/04/16 11:19, Uwe Schindler wrote: > as a temporary workaround I added you to the issues.apache.org "contributors" > role in Lucene and Solr projects. Could someone grant me the create issue permission as well, please? Username is bvd. Was trying to create a new issue with some new

Re: Upgrading Solr - Wiki

On 21/04/16 14:05, Steve Rowe wrote: > I found mention of IndexUpgrader only on > , > with no actual instructions anywhere else on the ref guide. It’s not clear > to me exactly which page would host such

Re: Upgrading Solr - Wiki

> However, it appears I don't have write access to the wiki. How do I go > about getting write access? Or should I just type up the documentation > and send to this mailing list? I should probably clarify that I'm talking about the Confluence Wiki and that my username is bvd. Thanks, - Bram

Upgrading Solr - Wiki

Hey folks, I wanted to update the Upgrading Solr wiki page to include a section about the usage of the IndexUpgrader tool, as its usage wasn't immediately obvious to me. However, it appears I don't have write access to the wiki. How do I go about getting write access? Or should I just type up

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.5.1

On 13/04/16 19:26, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Can you please test it with 5.5.1 so someone could back port it. Thanks. I've finished testing SOLR-8145 on branch_5_5. Patch applies cleanly and the bugfix works fine. I don't have commit access, so someone else will have to take care of that part. git

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.5.1

On 11/04/16 19:04, Ishan Chattopadhyaya wrote: > I'd like someone to backport the following: > SOLR-8838 > SOLR-8082 > SOLR-8865 Can we please add SOLR-8145 to that list? It fixes an incorrect oom_killer argument in the startupt script and a Jetty warning on startup. Please let me know if you'd

Preferred Development Branch?

Hi folks, If I wanted to make some changes that I'd like to see in 5.x, should I branch off 5.x and work on that? Or is it preferable to branch trunk and then backport to 5.x? Thanks! - Bram - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: Prepare for Release of Lucene/Solr 4.8!

On 04/09/2014 04:19 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: I was hoping to get the analytics stuff in place for 4.8, but I think it would be a Bad Idea (tm) to try to add this much new code (with the dozen or so merges I need to reconcile) in at the last minute, even though it doesn't touch much existing

Re: [GitHub] lucene-solr pull request: SOLR-5789 Add min/max modifiers to Atomi...

Could someone be so kind as to have a look at this PR? It's a feature that would make my life substantially easier :-) Thx! On 02/27/2014 05:25 PM, Bram Van Dam wrote: GitHub user codematters opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/39 Discussion and tips

Re: [GitHub] lucene-solr pull request: SOLR-5789 Add min/max modifiers to Atomi...

GitHub user codematters opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/39 Discussion and tips for improvements are welcome! Thanks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For

Re: Patches in Jira or pull requests on github?

Opening a pull request will send a notification to the mailing list, so that should get noticed the same as opening a JIRA. Excellent, thanks! Will also have a closer look at the developer tips. - Bram - To unsubscribe,

Patches in Jira or pull requests on github?

Hi folks, What's the preferred way of contributing a patch? The easiest from my perspective is a pull request on github (and it looks like there's a couple of pull requests already on there). Should I create a jira issue with an attachment or a link to the pull request? Anything else I

Re: The Old Git Discussion

On 01/03/2014 12:13 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: I can't make any cogent arguments about whether git is superior to subversion at the basic job of version control, whether it produces better workflows, or any similar argument. Generally speaking, I do think it's a good idea for projects like Apache

Re: SOLR-5302, Analytics

See, if people don't raise objections, I can spread the blame if things go wrong :) My opinion isn't particularly important, but I've been keeping an eye on this feature for a while. The devs seemed pretty confident about the status last I checked. It's an isolated feature with little (no?)

Re: Pivot Faceting with distinct counts

On 10/22/2013 02:25 PM, Andrew Psaltis wrote: 1. Getting distinct counts for a field other than the one being faceted on. 2. How would I get this field to surface in the response. If I'm understanding you correctly, you're using pivots as SQL-speak GROUP BY and would like to add aggregate