I'll change my vote to a -1.
Two reasons, #1 is based on the license header issue that I mentioned, and
will work on getting that sorted out this week.
#2 is that while I personally don't see the severity of the latest
identified issues as blocking, if we're going to immediately turn around
and
I went through the vote thread again, and it seems like there are issues
that folks aren't comfortable releasing with.
Jan, as you've been driving this, I'll leave it to you but I think if we
are certain about doing another follow up release with the fixes, we might
as well just do that one
Even though the votes are not decisive, here's my report and vote for Solr
9.0 RC4.
1. Smoke Tester passed in a single run! SUCCESS! [0:58:24.657506]
2. Manual testing of basic index/search capability using sample code.
3. Tested out some issues that were fixed in 8.11 and 9.0 to work correctly
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 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
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
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
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)
--
Also this changes my vote to -1
On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:44 AM Gus Heck 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.
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 wrote:
> Tried some seeds from Jenkins
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
Gus, re: the SKG failure: I was able to reproduce it, but haven't dug in
enough to say exactly what's going on. (off-the-cuff response: this test is
quite robust, and has uncovered edge-case issues before that are more about
"distributed faceting" generally than about "SKG" per se). I'd be
Noble and I just came across a bug in master concerning restarting of Solr,
where it was observed that registering live_nodes upon restart was failing
with NodeExistsException. We haven't looked further and don't know if it
affects 9.0.
In case it is a problem, and 9.0 has already released, we
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
>
> 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
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
15 matches
Mail list logo
