You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> on 2014/04/09 00:54:11 UTC
[VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Artifacts are located here:
http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
+1 from me:
SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Simon Willnauer <si...@gmail.com>.
for the lazy folks here is a ready to run cmd:
python3.2 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py
http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
1585778 4.7.2 /tmp/4.7.2-smoke
simon
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Simon Willnauer
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> SUCCESS! [1:24:59.129655]
>
> I upgraded ES and all tests pass.
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Dawid Weiss
> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> SUCCESS! [1:13:24.830763]
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Artifacts are located here:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>>>
>>> +1 from me:
>>>
>>> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Simon Willnauer <si...@gmail.com>.
+1
SUCCESS! [1:24:59.129655]
I upgraded ES and all tests pass.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Dawid Weiss
<da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
> +1
>
> SUCCESS! [1:13:24.830763]
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Artifacts are located here:
>> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>>
>> +1 from me:
>>
>> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Dawid Weiss <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>.
+1
SUCCESS! [1:13:24.830763]
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
>> Wait, are you -0 or -1? If you are just -0, i.e. you will not veto Robert's patch
>> to backport to 4.7.2, then I'd like to commit that.
>
> I am not against, but I would not respin because of that unless there is some other issue.
OK, I'll reopen the issue and commit to 4.7.x, in case we do a respin
/ future release.
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
Hi,
> Wait, are you -0 or -1? If you are just -0, i.e. you will not veto Robert's patch
> to backport to 4.7.2, then I'd like to commit that.
I am not against, but I would not respin because of that unless there is some other issue.
> but what about other possible Lucene bugs that fsync the wrong file?
Who cares? If the file exists, all is fine. If not, a 0-byte artifact is created. Again, this is not a serious bug. It existed since the early beginning of Lucene, no need to fix it today for a branch that’s outdated soon!
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:lucene@mikemccandless.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 7:58 PM
> To: Lucene/Solr dev
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >> However, I think we should back-port LUCENE-5570 to 4.7.2, especially
> >> given that 4.7.2 is the last release Java 1.6 users can use, I do
> >> think it's important to fix bugs there.
> >>
> >> Uwe, are you very strongly against fixing that issue on 4.7.2?
> >
> > I am -0 here. This issue just makes debugging harder, but causes no bugs or
> data corrumption, so we should not add stuff that cannot be solved natively
> with Java 6. LUCENE-5574 is the real issue, LUCENE-5570 was just confusing to
> those who tried to understand the bug. But as the bug is fixed, no need to fix
> the side-effect of 0 byte files.
>
> Wait, are you -0 or -1? If you are just -0, i.e. you will not veto Robert's patch
> to backport to 4.7.2, then I'd like to commit that.
>
> The problem is, this "creates 0 byte file instead of throwing FNFE/NSFE" bug
> can mask other (future) Lucene bugs; yes, we fixed LUCENE-5574, but what
> about other possible Lucene bugs that fsync the wrong file? Hopefully there
> are none, but if there are, it's much better to see an exception than silently
> create 0-byte files which later manifest as index corruption looking like your
> filesystem ate the file not Lucene.
>
> I agree it'd be great if we could do the same change everywhere, but
> because 4.7.x is Java 1.6, we can't, and I think the lesser evil is a slightly
> different patch (Robert's patch) than just not fixing the bug at all.
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>> However, I think we should back-port LUCENE-5570 to 4.7.2, especially given
>> that 4.7.2 is the last release Java 1.6 users can use, I do think it's important to
>> fix bugs there.
>>
>> Uwe, are you very strongly against fixing that issue on 4.7.2?
>
> I am -0 here. This issue just makes debugging harder, but causes no bugs or data corrumption, so we should not add stuff that cannot be solved natively with Java 6. LUCENE-5574 is the real issue, LUCENE-5570 was just confusing to those who tried to understand the bug. But as the bug is fixed, no need to fix the side-effect of 0 byte files.
Wait, are you -0 or -1? If you are just -0, i.e. you will not veto
Robert's patch to backport to 4.7.2, then I'd like to commit that.
The problem is, this "creates 0 byte file instead of throwing
FNFE/NSFE" bug can mask other (future) Lucene bugs; yes, we fixed
LUCENE-5574, but what about other possible Lucene bugs that fsync the
wrong file? Hopefully there are none, but if there are, it's much
better to see an exception than silently create 0-byte files which
later manifest as index corruption looking like your filesystem ate
the file not Lucene.
I agree it'd be great if we could do the same change everywhere, but
because 4.7.x is Java 1.6, we can't, and I think the lesser evil is a
slightly different patch (Robert's patch) than just not fixing the bug
at all.
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>> However, I think we should back-port LUCENE-5570 to 4.7.2, especially given
>> that 4.7.2 is the last release Java 1.6 users can use, I do think it's important to
>> fix bugs there.
>>
>> Uwe, are you very strongly against fixing that issue on 4.7.2?
>
> I am -0 here. This issue just makes debugging harder, but causes no bugs or data corrumption, so we should not add stuff that cannot be solved natively with Java 6. LUCENE-5574 is the real issue, LUCENE-5570 was just confusing to those who tried to understand the bug. But as the bug is fixed, no need to fix the side-effect of 0 byte files.
>
Personally I disagree with this synopsis: the leniency makes it
difficult to catch bugs of this nature. Had fsync() simply thrown
exception instead of creating new zero byte files, Simon and I would
maybe have a lot less grey hairs
So to me doing a best effort check for java6 has real value, compared
to just doing nothing at all.
But I'm happy to release without this and at least fix the corruption
bug and make progress forwards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
Hi,
> However, I think we should back-port LUCENE-5570 to 4.7.2, especially given
> that 4.7.2 is the last release Java 1.6 users can use, I do think it's important to
> fix bugs there.
>
> Uwe, are you very strongly against fixing that issue on 4.7.2?
I am -0 here. This issue just makes debugging harder, but causes no bugs or data corrumption, so we should not add stuff that cannot be solved natively with Java 6. LUCENE-5574 is the real issue, LUCENE-5570 was just confusing to those who tried to understand the bug. But as the bug is fixed, no need to fix the side-effect of 0 byte files.
Uwe
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Artifacts are located here:
> >
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r158577
> > 8/
> >
> > +1 from me:
> >
> > SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For
> > additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
-0
My smoke tester passed:
SUCCESS! [0:48:00.627423]
However, I think we should back-port LUCENE-5570 to 4.7.2, especially
given that 4.7.2 is the last release Java 1.6 users can use, I do
think it's important to fix bugs there.
Uwe, are you very strongly against fixing that issue on 4.7.2?
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
SUCCESS! [2:01:06.505778]
+1 to release!
Uwe
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 12:54 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
>
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r158577
> 8/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> one issue with the branch:
> Steve Rowe updated the version numbers in common-build.xml to 4.7.1-dev (which is not needed and should not be done, the release branch should have 4.7-dev for its lifetime). The official version is set on building the release artifacts.
> Because of this update, to be consistent, we should change version numbers to 4.7.2-dev (or better: revert to 4.7-dev).
>
> This is not an issue for respin, but if we do, the versions should be consistent.
>
I will take care of this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
Hi,
one issue with the branch:
Steve Rowe updated the version numbers in common-build.xml to 4.7.1-dev (which is not needed and should not be done, the release branch should have 4.7-dev for its lifetime). The official version is set on building the release artifacts.
Because of this update, to be consistent, we should change version numbers to 4.7.2-dev (or better: revert to 4.7-dev).
This is not an issue for respin, but if we do, the versions should be consistent.
We should add this to the release manager howto: Don't change the versions in common-build.xml unless you create a new branch. Definitely not on bugfix versions!
Uwe
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 12:54 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
>
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r158577
> 8/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>.
+1
SUCCESS! [1:12:28.222780]
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Steve Rowe <sa...@gmail.com>.
+1
SUCCESS! [0:55:03.792535]
On Apr 8, 2014, at 4:54 PM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Lucene/Solr 4.7.2
Posted by Anshum Gupta <an...@anshumgupta.net>.
+1
SUCCESS! [0:52:42.907434]
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Robert Muir <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artifacts are located here:
> http://people.apache.org/~rmuir/staging_area/lucene_solr_4_7_2_r1585778/
>
> +1 from me:
>
> SUCCESS! [0:49:41.525797]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
--
Anshum Gupta
http://www.anshumgupta.net