You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Hoss Man (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2014/08/17 20:27:18 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-6386) make secondary ordering of
facet.field values (and facet.pivot?) consistently deterministic
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6386?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14100035#comment-14100035 ]
Hoss Man commented on SOLR-6386:
--------------------------------
FWIW: this is the seed that caused a failure on trunk as of r1618485...
{noformat}
[junit4] 2> NOTE: reproduce with: ant test -Dtestcase=TestDistributedSearch -Dtests.method=testDistribSearch
-Dtests.seed=5547E29057A024AB -Dtests.multiplier=3 -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.locale=de_CH
-Dtests.timezone=Asia/Saigon -Dtests.file.encoding=ISO-8859-1
[junit4] FAILURE 14.6s J1 | TestDistributedSearch.testDistribSearch <<<
[junit4] > Throwable #1: junit.framework.AssertionFailedError:
.facet_counts.facet_fields.a_n_tdt.1970-01-01T00:00:00Z!=2010-04-20T11:00:00Z (unordered or missing)
[junit4] > at __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([5547E29057A024AB:D4A16C8820FF4497]:0)
[junit4] > at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:50)
[junit4] > at
org.apache.solr.BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.compareSolrResponses(BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.java:842)
[junit4] > at
org.apache.solr.BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.compareResponses(BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.java:861)
[junit4] > at
org.apache.solr.BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.query(BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.java:562)
[junit4] > at
org.apache.solr.BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.query(BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.java:542)
[junit4] > at
org.apache.solr.BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.query(BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.java:521)
[junit4] > at org.apache.solr.TestDistributedSearch.doTest(TestDistributedSearch.java:180)
[junit4] > at
org.apache.solr.BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.testDistribSearch(BaseDistributedSearchTestCase.java:875)
[junit4] > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
{noformat}
I confirmed that reverting to trunk prior to r1617788 (just prior to SOLR-2894 being committed) and applying only [this specific test change|https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/TestDistributedSearch.java?r1=1617789&r2=1617788&pathrev=1617789&view=patch] still failed (although it wasn't with the exact same master seed -- but it popped up fairly quickly w/beasting) to rule out this inconsistency as a side effect of the pivot changes. definitely seems to be an older behavior that pre-dates distrib pivots.
> make secondary ordering of facet.field values (and facet.pivot?) consistently deterministic
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6386
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6386
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Hoss Man
>
> as a fluke of how the SOLR-2894 patch evolved, it wound up adding a bit of testing of distributed facet.field on date fields (see [r1617789 changes to TestDistributedSearch|https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/TestDistributedSearch.java?r1=1617789&r2=1617788&pathrev=1617789]) ... but this started triggering some random failures due to facet constraints with identical values being sorted differently between the distributed query and the single node control query.
> We should make the facet.field (and facet.pivot) code order constraints with tied counts consistently regardless of whether it's a distrib search or not.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org