Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 release branch created

+1 to SOLR-6976 especially. I’m sad about SpanQueries not getting nuked yet :-( ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 release branch created

Anshum, are you going to create a 5.1 version in JIRA so we can appropriately assign issues? ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Thanks for setting it up. > > On W

Re: Randomized testing talk (your favorite moment)

Some of the bugs it has helped me find that I am most appreciative of are in testing spatial code. One comes to mind when I developed the IsWithin predicate, and others in computing the bounding lat-lon box of a geodetic circle, and… and on and on… but the details are unimportant really and to tell

Re: One other question

I’m puzzled… did you mean to send this to our dev list? The wording suggests it was in error. ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > My son-in-law pointed me at a co

Re: Interesting blog on G1 GC improvemnts u25 - u60

Thanks for sharing; I’ll add that to my reading list. FWIW I don’t trust the G1 enough for production use. Some random Lucene/Solr build failures are blamed on it, even. ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Dec 5

Re: Minimum test set for idempotent changes in schema.xml

Hi Alex, There isn’t a way to say “just schema-related ones”. But, if you suspect the tests you want to run will have a string in the class name then you can run tests for classes matching a supplied regexp. For example: ant test -Dtestcase="*High*" And do that from within a specific module (

Re: Minimum test set for idempotent changes in schema.xml

> Can you explain once more your suggestion by maybe giving a specific > example? > > Thanks > > Michael > > Am 07.12.14 um 04:29 schrieb [email protected]: > > Hi Alex, > > > > There isn’t a way to say “just schema-related ones”. But, if you > s

Re: what is the rule for updating CHANGES.txt

Michael, I recall you’re working on building a test tool that sees changes and runs applicable tests? If that’s the case, why would it matter if CHANGES.txt gets updated? The vast majority of the time there is a reference to a JIRA issue from the commit message, and most JIRA issues that have cod

Re: "facet.mincount=0" returns facet values with 0 counts for "q=*" query

Abhishek, Please send such questions to the solr-user list, not the Lucene dev list. ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Abhishek Sharma wrote: > Hi, > > Can any one help me understand wh

Re: Release 4.10.3

IMO there’s no such thing as having too many FSTs :-P ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:08 AM, Michael McCandless < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > If it's not too late, I'd

Re: [VOTE] Release 4.10.3 RC1

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Timothy Potter wrote: > Wow - that's a fast box Mike! > My thoughts exactly. +1 SUCCESS! [0:58:16.394370]

Re: Determining NumericType for a field

> Down to practicalities, we need Lucene 4.8 as our DocValues are Disk > based and that support was removed in 4.9. I assume you’re referring to the “Disk” DV format/Codec? The standard format has the data on disk too, it’s just that there’s some “small” (relative to the disk data) lookup refere

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-MacOSX (64bit/jdk1.7.0) - Build # 1959 - Still Failing!

Ouch; thanks! ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Michael McCandless < [email protected]> wrote: > > I committed a fix. > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > >

Re: Welcome Cassandra Targett to the Lucene / Solr PMC

Welcome Cassandra! On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 10:54 AM Steve Rowe wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Cassandra has accepted the PMC's invitation > to join. > > Welcome Cassandra! > > Steve > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsub

Re: 5.3.2 bug fix release

Yikes; I’m sure that was painful. So I just back-ported a couple issues, SOLR-8340 & SOLR-8059. I was about to manually keep the 5.3.2 section in branch_5x & trunk in sync but then thought better of it. Might as well wait until 5.3.2 is voted and then do it, since there are bound to be others wh

Re: CfP about Geospatial Track at ApacheCon, Vancouver

Thanks for the notice/invite, Uwe. I may send a proposal suggestion your way (& to Chris). It’ll be tough to choose between submitting to FOSS4G NA (May 2-5th in Raleigh NC) and ApacheCon. ~ David On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 5:28 AM Uwe Schindler wrote: > Hi Committers, hi Lucene users, > > On the

Re: Breaking Java back-compat in Solr

Great topic Anshum. I’ve been frustrated with the back-compat situation since Lucene/Solr 5 as a maintainer of my “SolrTextTagger”. One version of the plugin supports 4.3 thru the end of the 4x line, whereas on the 5x side I’ve needed 3 versions already (5.0-5,1, 5.2, 5.3+)! Sometimes on the API

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.4-Linux (32bit/jdk1.8.0_66) - Build # 390 - Still Failing!

I've seen this once before and will investigate this weekend. On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:33 AM Policeman Jenkins Server < [email protected]> wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.4-Linux/390/ > Java: 32bit/jdk1.8.0_66 -server -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC > > 1 tests failed. > FA

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.1 RC1

Clearly to me, the facet bug is a critical one to get into the release (and so is index corruption) and I'm glad it was caught in time to make it into this release. I think these are the only "critical" issues I'm aware of so I'm not concerned about "the floodgates opening" unless I hear of other

Re: Question about release plans amidst the git transition

+1 fine idea Rob! On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:18 AM Robert Muir wrote: > one idea, we could use it to our advantage: as soon as we go to git, > immediately (e.g. after just a few days or whatever) start a 5.5 > release? > > besides keeping things less confusing, it could make the 6.0 release > mor

Re: intellij git history

I'm seeing this too Yonik :-( This really sucks. I googled and found this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27797965/showing-graphically-the-equivalent-of-git-log-follow-in-intellij Which makes reference to 2 IntelliJ issue tracker bug reports, both marked as closed years ago. In summary, Jet

Re: intellij git history

24, 2016 9:59 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: intellij git history > >> > >> We can move the reference for master and branch_5x -- these are > >> affected. I can do it tonight and cherry pick any commits that have >

Merge vs Rebase

[image: lucene-merge-commit-pic.png] Just to put a little picture to this, I noticed the following: (see attached pic) I suspect it was the bi-product of using a merge based pull (I think the default?) instead of a rebase one, and as a result we have this little loop in the log. No doubt there i

Re: Merge vs Rebase

ange? >>> > >>> > I'm not a Git expert, but I know (think...) that if you merge C1 and >>> C2, and >>> > C2 is a parent of C1, Git doesn't do a merge commit. Someone probably >>> can >>> > confirm that. >>> > >

Re: highlight on phrase search not working

Hi Zaccheo, In general this developer community lives on JIRA. Since you have questions pertaining to that JIRA issue then simply put those comments there. I already commented on that issue a few minutes ago. The general info for "how to contribute" (to Solr; largely applies to Lucene too) is fi

Re: reviews.apache.org / GIT migration

+1; I can't see how anyone would object to adding/retaining support for the tool. Nobody is forced to use it. I'm curious of the move to Git allows for possibly better options. I've heard good things about Gerrit but I've never tried it. I have mixed feelings of my experience with Reviewboard,

Re: Merge vs Rebase

Rob, I'll trust your assessment of the technical deficiencies of the Hadoop codebase as I have no experience to say one way or the other. But I'm confused why this is relevant to wether they have a decent process & docs on how to use git? For reference I think Erick is referring to this: https://

Re: Hmm Git mistake I believe

nspired, and can therefore > be useful to future devs digging through the history. > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:18 AM, [email protected] > wrote: > > Yup. And when you pulled, you didn't do it v

Re: reviews.apache.org / GIT migration

u are looking for a tool to assist in reviews, I would recommend >> Review Board. If you are looking for a tool to help you manage the commit >> process, gerrit does that pretty well. >> >> Greg >> >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:42 AM, [email protected] <

Re: Ongoing index maintenance

Hi, I don't think the Lucene layer is lacking in this regard. Higher up the stack in Solr (or ES), it's conceivable one could do some of the functions you propose by adding by wrapping the reader (FilteredReader) that then does what you want -- removing a field, renaming a field, aliasing a field

Re: "newdev" Label Reminder

Thanks for the reminder Jason; I'll keep this in mind. I'll create an issue today I have in mind as appropriate for newdev :-) On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 8:56 AM Jason Gerlowski wrote: > Hi all, > > Just wanted to remind everyone of the "newdev" label, which is used to > identify JIRA tasks approp

Re: Updating whoweare page

Thanks for this cleanup Jan. I'm not sure how useful the date of joining is. It's not a proxy for who is active, which is more useful but also hard to capture. Perhaps we could link to BlackDuck's "OpenHub" (formerly oholoh.net or something like that; it was a terrible name I always typo'ed) htt

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.0-RC1

Nice job everyone (especially Upayavira) — we’re getting this one out the door with no respins. I think it’s been many releases before that last happened. ~ David On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:30 AM Michael McCandless < [email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Erick Er

Re: accessing Lucene package members from Solr

Good day Mikhail. Without looking at the details, I have no qualms about making a method public if you need to call it from another package. Just add @lucene.internal to the method; perhaps warn in comments that it’s likely going away in 6.0. ~ David On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:47 PM Mikhail Khludn

Re: Lucene/Solr git mirror will soon turn off

+1 totally agree. Any way; the bloat should largely be the binaries & unrelated projects, not code (small text files). On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:36 PM Doug Turnbull < [email protected]> wrote: > In defense of more history immediately available--it is often far more > useful to

Re: 5.3.2 bug fix release

I’d like to backport SOLR-8059 & SOLR-8060 (same as SOLR-8340): NPEs that can happen in DebugComponent & HighlightComponent when distrib.singlePass=true (which is implied under certain conditions even if not explicitly =true). On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:54 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > If there is a 5.

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (32bit/jdk1.8.0_60) - Build # 14285 - Still Failing!

Thanks! I'm not sure why I didn't find this in my testing. On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:00 PM Anshum Gupta wrote: > I've fixed this on both trunk and 5x. > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Policeman Jenkins Server < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-So

Re: Welcome Nick Knize as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Nick! We’re very fortunate to have your spatial expertise. ~ David On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:40 PM Nicholas Knize wrote: > Thanks for the honor to join such a talented group! > > Brief Bio: I started as a Meteorology major in undergrad. After the > Meteorology program bored me with col

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-5.x - Build # 1003 - Still Failing

I created an issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6873 On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 7:52 PM Apache Jenkins Server < [email protected]> wrote: > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-5.x/1003/ > > 1 tests failed. > FAILED: > org.apache.lucene.spatial.prefi

Re: Welcome Dennis Gove as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Dennis! On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:19 AM Joel Bernstein wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Dennis Gove has accepted the PMC's > invitation to become a committer. > > Dennis, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. > > Your account is not entirely ready yet. We will

Re: Welcome Tomás Fernández Löbbe to the PMC

Welcome Tomás! On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:16 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe wrote: > Thanks everyone! > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Ramkumar R. Aiyengar < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Congratulations Tomas :) >> On 6 Nov 2015 09:53, "Anshum Gupta" wrote: >> >>> I'm pleased to announce

Re: Welcome Joel Bernstein to the PMC

Welcome Joel! On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:26 AM Yonik Seeley wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Joel as accepted the PMC's invitation to join. > > Welcome Joel! > > -Yonik > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

Re: 5.4.1 release

Adrien, Mike: Thanks for working on a 5.4.1 release. IMO the bug you pointed out (LUCENE-2229) should be back-ported because I can't imagine someone depending on this behavior. Its ultimately a bug in the sizing of the fragment, and furthermore only occurs in infrequent circumstances. RE Solr: T

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.3.2-RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [0:49:17.877825] On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:21 AM Anshum Gupta wrote: > I forgot to add my own +1. > > SUCCESS! [0:36:47.637916] > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:07 AM, Anshum Gupta > wrote: > >> Please vote for the RC1 release candidate for Lucene/Solr 5.3.2 >> >> The artifacts can b

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.1 RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [0:53:42.286712] On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:41 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > Please vote for the RC1 release candidate for Lucene/Solr 5.4.1 > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-5.4.1-RC1-rev1724447/ > > You can run the s

Re: Welcome Areek Zillur to the Lucene / Solr PMC

Welcome Areek! On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 3:49 PM Simon Willnauer wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Areek has accepted the PMC's invitation to > join. > > Welcome Areek! > > > Simon > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/david

Re: Next release...

+1 to not sooner than February 2016 (one year later) On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 6:25 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > Le jeu. 12 nov. 2015 à 18:21, Erick Erickson a > écrit : > >> Are there any tentative (not firm commitments) time frames for 6.0? >> > > I don't think we talked about it before. Maybe we c

git commits on JIRA issues;

I noticed something different today about the bot that posts git commits to applicable JIRA issues. I recently worked on SOLR-7968 -- super simple with 2 commits, one for master and one for branch_5x. I promptly saw a comment appear after each commit. But then today, to my surprise, I got notifi

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

o years ago at ApacheCon I attended a talk by David Nalley. This issue >> was brought up, and I spoke a little with him afterwards about it. At that >> time, infra had no plans to change anything about how the alerts worked. >> On Feb 2, 2016 19:43, "[email protected]&

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

k branches is crazy. > > - Mark > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:09 PM [email protected] < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Ok thanks. It's too bad it's not going to be changed. IMO, I don't >> these extra commit notifications are helpful be

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

rther discussion of our theories on how to fix it should happen on the issue. On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:42 PM [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > +1 I'll do it. > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:29 PM Mark Miller wrote: > >> Yeah man, ugly noise. I thin

Re: Naming branches so that life is easier

Establishing conventions and adhering to them would be good. Some observations I have with your example: you suggested a hypothetical branch named "dweiss/jira3826". IMO that branch name isn't a great name because it is ambiguous with respect to it being for Lucene or Solr. Most of our branches

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

Right; I can't imagine any of us actually trying to merge master to branch_whatever. We cherry-pick. Nobody has dissented on that to my knowledge. ~ David On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:19 PM Ryan Ernst wrote: > > Are you sure *all* back porting will be done by cherry picking? > > Using merge commi

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (32bit/jdk-9-ea+104) - Build # 15822 - Still Failing!

LOL On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:43 AM Uwe Schindler wrote: > LOL. If compact string wouldn't have been disabled, I would say: Compact > String comprumpted(TM) the version :-) > > - > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: [email protected] > > > >

Re: What is the story for AdminUI for 5.x vs 6.0?

+1 to Erick's sentiment. 6.0 new UI. On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:02 PM Erick Erickson wrote: > My vote is +1 for 6.0 defaulting to the new admin UI. Whatever remains > undone, it's time to move to the new version and fix whatever crops > up. > > Maybe just leave a link in to the old UI, but defin

Re: ZK Connection Failure leads to stale data

Both sound very good to me, Dennis. Thanks. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:55 AM Dennis Gove wrote: > Just wanted to take a moment to get anyone's thoughts on the following > issues > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8599 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8666 > > The originati

Re: 5.4 branch created, feature freeze in place (was Re: A 5.4 release?)

I plan to address SOLR-8180 which is about adding jcl-over-slf4j as a dependency on SolrJ. On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:11 AM Upayavira wrote: > I have created the lucene_solr_5_4 branch. Please, no new features in this > branch. > > Please update this thread with any changes you propose to make to

Re: 5.4 branch created, feature freeze in place (was Re: A 5.4 release?)

SOLR-8180 (jcl-over-slf4j) is there too now, some 30min ago. On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:27 PM Upayavira wrote: > Thx, I hope to create the first RC tomorrow. > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015, at 06:36 PM, Noble Paul wrote: > > I'm done with SOLR-8355 > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Noble Paul wrot

Re: Lucene/Solr git mirror will soon turn off

I agree with Rob on this — delete the ‘jar’s from git history, for all the reasons Rob said. If someone wants to attempt to actually *build* an old release, and thus needs the jars, then they are welcome to use ASF SVN archives for that purpose instead, and even then apparently it will be a challe

Re: Lucene/Solr git mirror will soon turn off

I understand Gus; but we’d like to separate the question of wether we should move from svn to git from fixing the git mirror. It’s contentious — I encourage you to search the list archives for some of the arguments. On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 12:53 PM Gus Heck wrote: > If I understand this thread (

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.0-RC1

+1 for release. (tested with Java 7) SUCCESS! [0:56:31.943245] On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:05 PM Steve Rowe wrote: > +1 > > Docs, javadocs, and changes look good. > > Smoke tester was happy with Java7 and Java8: > > SUCCESS! [1:53:58.550314] > > Steve > > > On Dec 7, 2015, at 5:31 AM, Upayavira

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-5.x - Build # 1040 - Still Failing

Mikhail, In the future, particularly when committing code that uses Java 8 features, be sure to compile & run tests even on the 5x branch after back-porting but before committing. From time to time this fails for stuff, like easy-to-forget cases of not using ‘final’. ~ David On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 a

Re: Lucene/Solr 6.0.0 Release Branch

I just want to clarify you(Nick) / our expectations about this release branch. It seems, based on issues I've seen like LUCENE-7072, that we can commit to the release branch without your permission as RM. If this is true, then I presume the tacit approval is okay so long as it's not a new feature

Re: Welcome Upayavira as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Upayavira! On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 3:02 PM Steve Rowe wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Upayavira has accepted the PMC's invitation > to become a committer. > > Upayavira, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. > > Mike McCandless, the Lucene PMC chair, has alre

Re: Version field as DV

I don’t know if it’s worth it in terms of the trade-offs, but there’s something to be said about having *both* indexed=true & docValues=true on the _version_ field in particular. docValues is not an “index”; any operation other than looking up the value for a specific document is O(docs) with docV

Re: svn commit: r1688487 - in /lucene/cms/trunk/content/solr: assets/images/book_as3ess.jpg assets/images/book_asess_3ed.jpg assets/images/book_s14ess.jpg resources.mdtext

Palm-to-face! I'll fix later today. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:29 PM Chris Hostetter wrote: > > Ummm, david ... i hate to tell you this, but it looks like you forgot the > "L" in "Solr" in the title of your own book. > > more then once. > > :) > > : Mitchell](https://www.linkedin.com/in/mat

Re: svn commit: r1688487 - in /lucene/cms/trunk/content/solr: assets/images/book_as3ess.jpg assets/images/book_asess_3ed.jpg assets/images/book_s14ess.jpg resources.mdtext

Ah; I see you fixed it already. Thanks! On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:18 PM [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > Palm-to-face! I'll fix later today. > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:29 PM Chris Hostetter > wrote: > >> >> Ummm, david ... i hate

Re: solr 4.5 replicated slaves don't delete old files in /index directory

Ted, Please ask again on the solr-user list; this list is for development of Lucene/Solr. Good luck, ~ David On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:23 PM Ted Cao wrote: > Hi, I hope someone is aware of this bug and could point me to > either > old Jira ticket > or advice on how it can be safely fixed ... > >

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux 64 Test Only - Build # 54457 - Failure!

I’m not sure what to make of this. The whole suite timed out after 2 hours. The seed doesn’t reproduce, at least when I ran via IntelliJ just this spatial test. It’d be nice if I could have CI re-run the same build with same chosen random seed and JVM args, etc. On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 9:36 AM

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux 64 Test Only - Build # 54457 - Failure!

... > > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:04 PM, [email protected] < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I’m not sure what to make of this. The whole suite timed out after 2 >> hours. The se

Re: ADDREPLICA and maxShardsPerNode and specifying a node

+1 to all Shai said. On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:42 AM Shai Erera wrote: > I think that if addreplica is called, we should assume the user > understands what he's doing, and we can safely ignore maxShardsPerNode. > > +1 in renaming it. I don't think it's late to do anything. First, it > probably is

Re: Modifying DefaultSolrHighlighter

Hi Dmitry, I am pretty well versed in the sub-class-ability of DefaultSolrHighlighter. Most likely the problem you see is that you are using the no-arg constructor. Instead, pass in a SolrCore. It is called via reflection. In 5.2 I removed the no-arg constructor. ~ David On Tue, May 5, 2015

Re: Modifying DefaultSolrHighlighter

lrCore) { > this.solrCore = solrCore; > } > > > > should we use the second one? > > Regards, > Dmitry > > On 5 May 2015 at 15:03, [email protected] > wrote: > >> Hi Dmitry, >> >> I am pretty well versed in the sub-class-ability of

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-MacOSX (64bit/jdk1.8.0) - Build # 2270 - Failure!

This turned out to be a bug in the test infrastructure that Geo3d uses, copied from Spatial4j: Permalink I’m fixing. On Wed, May 6,

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux Java8 64 Test Only - Build # 46430 - Failure!

That test utility class was ported (copied) from Spatial4j. As a copy, it could be modified to extend LTC. Ideally, Spatial4j would publish the test JAR so that this could have been used without copying it (which will be addressed in the next release; Nick fixed this)… although then extending LTC

Re: Configsets and Config APIs in Solr

+1 Tomas. On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:40 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe < [email protected]> wrote: > I agree about differentiating the mutable part (configoverlay, generated > schema, etc) and the immutable (the configset) , but I think it would be > better if the mutable part is placed under /coll

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.8.0_60-ea-b12) - Build # 12585 - Still Failing!

For a long while on my local checkout, I have svn:ignore at the root level set to ‘*’. I really think we should consider committing this; I think I’ve advocated for it before. RE “precommit” being a pain — yeah but, like Mike already said, it catches problems. At least it’s faster lately than it

TermsQuery in ‘join’ module redundant?

Today I noticed org.apache.lucene.search.join.TermsQuery (package access) in the join module that is functionally equivalent to one by the same name in the queries module. It may be a bit historical since the one in the queries module until recently was a Filter, not a Query. But now there is red

Re: [VOTE] 5.1.0 RC2

+1 SUCCESS! [0:49:30.419933] ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Timothy Potter wrote: > Please vote for the second release candidate for Lucene/Solr 5.1.0 > > The artifacts can be downl

Re: Examples in JIRA issues & CHANGES messages

Great advise; thanks Yonik. ~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > Devs & contributors, please remember to be nice to other contributors > and describe what your patch

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.7.0_80-ea-b05) - Build # 12125 - Still Failing!

Woops; sorry for the noise in the highlighter; I'll fix On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 4:51 PM Policeman Jenkins Server < [email protected]> wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/12125/ > Java: 64bit/jdk1.7.0_80-ea-b05 -XX:-UseCompressedOops > -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC > >

Re: Lucene/Solr 6.0.0 Release Branch

I consider https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056 (a little spatail3d reshuffling) blocker before 6.0 as it's the ideal time to move things around / rename. But I don't mind doing an extra cherry pick in the end if you want to go create the branch without waiting. So I don't know if yo

Re: Master branch and java version

Me too; minutes after your notice Alan. Thanks for the FYI. On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:18 AM Varun Thacker wrote: > I also ran into the same problem. I was using 1.8.0_31 . Upgrading worked > though. > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:19 AM, Alan Woodward wrote: > >> common.compile-core: >> [javac

Copyrights

I'm considering doing some enhancements to Lucene/Solr on behalf of another organization/entity who wants me to include copyright statements to them. Same ASLv2 license. This is no big deal; right? I see we've already got some source files with non-ASF copyright licenses (e.g. Automata.java and o

Re: Copyrights

bug and makes changes to those files. Presumably we're fine, but some > people might feel a little strange assigning copyright back to a unknown > company instead of licensing use to the ASF. > > Mike > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM, [email protected] < > da

Re: Remove woodstox-core-asl and stax2-api dependencies from Solr?

Yeah; Uwe’s story is also as I understand it. IMO the dependencies aren’t worth it unless someone demonstrably proves otherwise. Given that SolJ mostly uses javabin (response by default but not request; and requests tend to be small), XML performance is less of an issue as well. ~ David On Thu,

Re: Apache Lucene Update 2015-09-04

Thanks for this Mike :-) On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:02 AM Michael McCandless wrote: > Lucene summary for this week: > >- A 5.3.1 bugfix release may be coming soon > > >- See the confusion matrix >

Re: [VOTE] 5.3.0 RC2

+1 (Java 7) SUCCESS! [1:02:40.331020] -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: Switching AngularUI to default

With the old UI, I suggest doing something to the CSS to make it more obvious you’re using the old UI… like changing the background color or maybe instead of the CSS insert a label somewhere. It’s very confusing to switch and forget which one you’re using! On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:11 AM Stefan M

Re: LatLonType and wildcard ranges

Already filed long ago: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3977 On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:58 AM Erick Erickson wrote: > I get a parse error (looking at a user's list question) when trying to > do something like: > q=lat_lon_field:[* TO *], something like: > > INFO - 2015-09-16 15:48:56

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.7.0_80) - Build # 13979 - Failure!

This is a duplicate of a known issue. Spatial4j 0.5 fixes this. I'll have a patch for that later today. On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:42 AM Policeman Jenkins Server < [email protected]> wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/13979/ > Java: 64bit/jdk1.7.0_80 -XX:-UseComp

Re: Welcome Mikhail Khludnev as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome! Well deserved Mikhail! On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:24 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Mikhail Khludnev has accepted the PMC's > invitation to become a committer. > > Mikhail, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. > > Your handle "mkhl" has al

Re: Welcome Christine Poerschke as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Christine! ~ David On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:43 PM Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) < [email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the invitation and all the welcomes! > > super brief bio: > * based in the UK (originally from Germany) > * software developer in the News Search

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux 64 Test Only - Build # 57226 - Failure!

Added comment to existing issue LUCENE-6671. On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 6:59 AM wrote: > *BUILD FAILURE* > Build URL > http://build-eu-00.elastic.co/job/lucene_linux_java8_64_test_only/57226/ > Project:lucene_linux_java8_64_test_only Randomization: > JDK8,local,heap[621m],-server > +UseSerialGC

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (64bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60) - Build # 12975 - Failure!

Ignore this; I'll fix the test Tuesday. On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 11:36 AM Policeman Jenkins Server < [email protected]> wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux/12975/ > Java: 64bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60 -XX:-UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseSerialGC > > 2 tests failed. > FAILED:

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.7.0_80) - Build # 12789 - Failure!

Bug filed: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6535 On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 8:42 PM Policeman Jenkins Server wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/12789/ > Java: 64bit/jdk1.7.0_80 -XX:-UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseG1GC > > 1 tests failed. > FAILED: org.apache

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

LUCENE-6535 is another one. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:57 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar < [email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Steve! > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Steve Rowe wrote: > >> >> > On Jun 9, 2015, at 8:57 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Looks

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

NPE if adjacent path > segments w > ere co-linear > > Karl > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:30 PM, [email protected] < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> LUCENE-6535 is another one. >> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:57 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar <

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

As mention in the JIRA ticket; this won’t be back-ported as it only applies to the WGS84 feature added in 5.3. Sorry for any confusion. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:42 PM [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, I’ll port that too. > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

of usage and help us solidify it for "official" > release without trying to shoehorn a patch into 5.2.1 that's not > critical to normal Solr/Lucene functioning. > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 9:42 AM, [email protected] > wrote: > > Yeah, I’ll port that too. > >

<    1   2   3   >