You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@lucene.apache.org by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> on 2010/06/07 17:20:42 UTC
[VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Hi all,
I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
(which both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding branches.
Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
scheduled release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
votes from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes
if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of their
parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are equal except
deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
possible release announcement soon for corrections.
Artifacts can be found at:
http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
ev951790/
Changes:
http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
Maven artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
ev951790/maven/
Happy testing!
P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de :-)
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
+1 to release.
"ant test" passes for both -src.tar.gz downloads, and .asc's check
out, and Lucene in Action 2nd Edition's tests all pass w/ 3.0.2
dropped in.
Mike
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>
>> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
>> (which both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
>> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding branches.
>> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
>> scheduled release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
>> votes from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
>> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes
>> if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>>
>> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of their
>> parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are equal
>> except
>> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
>> possible release announcement soon for corrections.
>>
>> Artifacts can be found at:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
>> ev951790/
>
> PyLucene 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 built from their respective Lucene artifacts pass
> all tests.
>
> +1
>
> Andi..
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
+1
dropped into my app, everything works and my tests pass...
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>
>> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
>> (which both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
>> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding branches.
>> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
>> scheduled release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
>> votes from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
>> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes
>> if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>>
>> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of their
>> parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are equal
>> except
>> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
>> possible release announcement soon for corrections.
>>
>> Artifacts can be found at:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
>> ev951790/
>
> PyLucene 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 built from their respective Lucene artifacts pass
> all tests.
>
> +1
>
> Andi..
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
> (which both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding branches.
> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
> scheduled release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
> votes from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes
> if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>
> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of their
> parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are equal except
> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
> possible release announcement soon for corrections.
>
> Artifacts can be found at:
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-take1-r
> ev951790/
PyLucene 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 built from their respective Lucene artifacts pass
all tests.
+1
Andi..
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Simon Willnauer <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Yonik Seeley
<yo...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Chris Hostetter
> <ho...@fucit.org> wrote:
>>
>> : See 3.0.2: http://s.apache.org/6kf
>> : vs. 3.0.1: http://s.apache.org/t5
>>
>> Ugh... ok, well i guess the precident has allready been set then. hope it
>> doesn't bite us in the ass down the road.
>
> Here's an interesting one I remember from the past... a last minute
> optimization:
> http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/66bc5d5142a07c4/1_9_rc1
>
> And due to that last minute optimization, a bug fix release followed
> very shortly ;-)
> http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/22d6566ceddf69ce/lucene_1_9_1_release_available
I wouldn't wanna risk that though!
I don't think the change is super critical but it would be nice for
the folks using PMS to have this improvement. But I agree with Yonik
that we should rather follow the pessimistic path especially if
testing has already been done. When I talked to uwe earlier this week
we thought we should backport and ask the community, if a fair bit of
folks would have volunteered to test again I guess it would have been
a good idea. Yet, we already have the artifact which have been tested
so lets vote on those.
Thoughts?
simon
> -Yonik
> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Yonik Seeley <yo...@lucidimagination.com>.
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Chris Hostetter
<ho...@fucit.org> wrote:
>
> : See 3.0.2: http://s.apache.org/6kf
> : vs. 3.0.1: http://s.apache.org/t5
>
> Ugh... ok, well i guess the precident has allready been set then. hope it
> doesn't bite us in the ass down the road.
Here's an interesting one I remember from the past... a last minute
optimization:
http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/66bc5d5142a07c4/1_9_rc1
And due to that last minute optimization, a bug fix release followed
very shortly ;-)
http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/22d6566ceddf69ce/lucene_1_9_1_release_available
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
I would argue my 3 cases were borderline bugs -- they weren't just
pure perf improvements.
2135 acts like a mem leak, in that we retain [often very large] memory
for longer than we should. 2161 is nasty choke point in NRT (getting
a new NRT reader syncs the old one thus blocking any searches, since
searches use sync'd methods like getNorms, I think). 2360 was a
regression, specifically indexing small docs got a slower due to the
fix from another issue.
That said, I don't think we need to be so strict ("only bug fixes get
backported"). If someone has the itch/time/energy and is willing to
do the work for backport and the risk is low, back compat is
preserved, etc., I think it's great.
Mike
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Chris Hostetter
<ho...@fucit.org> wrote:
>
> : See 3.0.2: http://s.apache.org/6kf
> : vs. 3.0.1: http://s.apache.org/t5
>
> Ugh... ok, well i guess the precident has allready been set then. hope it
> doesn't bite us in the ass down the road.
>
>
> -Hoss
>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
: See 3.0.2: http://s.apache.org/6kf
: vs. 3.0.1: http://s.apache.org/t5
Ugh... ok, well i guess the precident has allready been set then. hope it
doesn't bite us in the ass down the road.
-Hoss
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
See 3.0.2: http://s.apache.org/6kf
vs. 3.0.1: http://s.apache.org/t5
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_lucene@fucit.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 6:43 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> released
>
>
> : Thats not new in this release, there were perf improvements committed by
> : mikemccandless before, too.
>
> Seriously? ... i don't remember this at all ... which releases?
>
> It just seems like a really bad habit to get into -- users should have a
> reasonable expectation that code the "worked" in X.Y.Z will still work
exactly
> the same way in X.Y.(Z+1) ... it's only the broken code that should
change.
>
>
>
> -Hoss
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
: Thats not new in this release, there were perf improvements committed by
: mikemccandless before, too.
Seriously? ... i don't remember this at all ... which releases?
It just seems like a really bad habit to get into -- users should have a
reasonable expectation that code the "worked" in X.Y.Z will still work
exactly the same way in X.Y.(Z+1) ... it's only the broken code that
should change.
-Hoss
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
Thats not new in this release, there were perf improvements committed by
mikemccandless before, too.
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_lucene@fucit.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 6:34 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> released
>
>
> FWIW: I have not had a chance to review the RC, but....
>
> : Simon and me decided, that we want to have LUCENE-2494 (Modify
> : ParallelMultiSearcher to use a CompletionService instead of slowly
polling
> : for results) inside Lucene Java 3.0.2. This is an significant
performance
> : improvement. It will not go to 2.9.3, as its Java 1.5 only.
>
> ...this doesn't make senes to me. even if this is a rock solid patch, if
it's a
> performance improvement then presumably it's not a bug fix -- in which
case
> it seems like it should wait for a feature release.
>
> maybe i'm just missunederstanding the nature of hte issue -- but the goal
of
> bug fix releases should be to fix known bugs that prevent existing client
code
> from functioning, while minimizing the risk of introducing new bugs in
> existing code that already functions -- making performance iprovements to
> code that is currently functional risks introducing bugs.
>
>
>
> -Hoss
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
FWIW: I have not had a chance to review the RC, but....
: Simon and me decided, that we want to have LUCENE-2494 (Modify
: ParallelMultiSearcher to use a CompletionService instead of slowly polling
: for results) inside Lucene Java 3.0.2. This is an significant performance
: improvement. It will not go to 2.9.3, as its Java 1.5 only.
...this doesn't make senes to me. even if this is a rock solid patch, if
it's a performance improvement then presumably it's not a bug fix -- in
which case it seems like it should wait for a feature release.
maybe i'm just missunederstanding the nature of hte issue -- but the goal
of bug fix releases should be to fix known bugs that prevent existing
client code from functioning, while minimizing the risk of introducing new
bugs in existing code that already functions -- making performance
iprovements to code that is currently functional risks introducing bugs.
-Hoss
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
This is why I ask first.
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmiller@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 1:49 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> released
>
> I'd say that's a very weird type of issue to cause a respin and get
everyone to
> test and vote again, but I won't say I'm against.
>
> - Mark
>
> http://www.lucidimagination.com (mobile)
>
> On Jun 11, 2010, at 7:13 AM, "Uwe Schindler" <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Simon and me decided, that we want to have LUCENE-2494 (Modify
> > ParallelMultiSearcher to use a CompletionService instead of slowly
> > polling for results) inside Lucene Java 3.0.2. This is an significant
> > performance improvement. It will not go to 2.9.3, as its Java 1.5
> > only.
> >
> > I would like to respin 3.0.2, the artifacts of 2.9.3 would stay as
> > they are, as the vote seems completed. As the date of publishing was
> > planned for Friday next week, we have enough time. It would be nice,
> > if you could test again, I will post new artifacts soon!
> >
> > Is somebody against?
> >
> > Uwe
> >
> > -----
> > 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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 6:44 PM
> >> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
> >> be released
> >>
> >> Alas, I have 4 envs (Windows Server 2003, OpenSolaris 2009.06, CentOS
> >> 5.4, OS X 10.6.2, running stress tests for 4+ hours now, and I
> >> haven't hit a
> > single
> >> failure...
> >>
> >> If nobody else can repro this, I think we should not hold up the
> >> release?
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>
> >> wrote:
> >>> No idea, its NTFS on Windows 7, 64 bit, JDK 1.4.2_19-32bit. The test
> >>> now works, so cannot reproduce.
> >>>
> >>> Not idea what we should do!
> >>>
> >>> -----
> >>> 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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 2:36 PM
> >>>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
> >>>> be released
> >>>>
> >>>> This looks like something new to me (doesn't ring a bell).
> >>>>
> >>>> It looks odd -- the assertion that's tripping would seem to
> >>>> indicate
> >>>> that
> >>> a file
> >>>> that we are copying into a CFS file (after flushing) is still
> >>>> changing
> >>> while we
> >>>> are copying, which is not good. All files should be closed
> >>>> before we
> >>> build the
> >>>> CFS. Strange... was this just a local hard drive / NTFS file
> >>>> system,
> > Uwe?
> >>>>
> >>>> I also can't repro, so far -- I have a while(1) stress test running
> >>>> on
> >>> OpenSolaris
> >>>> and Windows Server 2003, but no failures yet...
> >>>>
> >>>> Can anyone else get this test to fail?
> >>>>
> >>>> Mike
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure,
> >>>>> which i cannot reproduce:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
> >>>>> [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed:
> >>>>> 9,017 sec
> >>>>> [junit]
> >>>>> [junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
> >>>>> [junit] Thread-45: hit exception
> >>>>> [junit] java.lang.AssertionError
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.j
> >>>> a
> >>>>> va:195
> >>>>> )
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(Document
> >>>> sWr
> >>>>> iter.j
> >>>>> ava:672)
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal
> >>>>> (IndexWriter.jav
> >>>>> a:4
> >>>>> 418)
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546
> >>>> )
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500
> >>>> )
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimi
> >>>> z
> >>>>> e.java
> >>>>> :92)
> >>>>> [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
> >>>>> [junit] Testcase:
> >>>>>
> >> testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
> >>>>> FAILED
> >>>>> [junit] null
> >>>>> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOpti
> >>>> m
> >>>>> ize.ja
> >>>>> va:113)
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(Tes
> >>>> t
> >>>>> Thread
> >>>>> edOptimize.java:154)
> >>>>> [junit] at
> >>>>> org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare
> >>>>> (LuceneTestCase.java:2
> >>>>> 21)
> >>>>> [junit]
> >>>>> [junit]
> >>>>> [junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
> >>>>> FAILED
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is
> >>>>> so,
> >>>>> we can proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing
> >>>>> a test build on my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing
> >>>>> "volatile"
> >>>>> on field in this test)?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Uwe
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----
> >>>>> Uwe Schindler
> >>>>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de
> >>>>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
> >>>>>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> >>>>>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
> >>>>>> be
> >>>>> released
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and
> >>>>>> 3.0.2
> >>>>> (which
> >>>>>> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
> >>>>>> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding
> >>>> branches.
> >>>>>> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes,
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>> scheduled
> >>>>>> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
> > votes
> >>>>>> from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
> >>>>>> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The
> >>>>>> vote
> >>>>>> passes if at
> >>>>> least
> >>>>>> three binding +1 votes are cast.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of
> >>>>>> their parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they
> > are
> >>>>>> equal
> >>>>> except
> >>>>>> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post
> > the
> >>>>> possible
> >>>>>> release announcement soon for corrections.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Artifacts can be found at:
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> >> 3.0.2-
> >>>>>> take1-r
> >>>>>> ev951790/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Changes:
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> >> 3.0.2-
> >>>>>> take1-r
> >>>>>> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> >> 3.0.2-
> >>>>>> take1-r
> >>>>>> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> >> 3.0.2-
> >>>>>> take1-r
> >>>>>> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> >> 3.0.2-
> >>>>>> take1-r
> >>>>>> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maven artifacts:
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> >> 3.0.2-
> >>>>>> take1-r
> >>>>>> ev951790/maven/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Happy testing!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de
> > :-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----
> >>>>>> Uwe Schindler
> >>>>>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> >>>>>> http://www.thetaphi.de
> >>>>>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
I'd say that's a very weird type of issue to cause a respin and get
everyone to test and vote again, but I won't say I'm against.
- Mark
http://www.lucidimagination.com (mobile)
On Jun 11, 2010, at 7:13 AM, "Uwe Schindler" <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Simon and me decided, that we want to have LUCENE-2494 (Modify
> ParallelMultiSearcher to use a CompletionService instead of slowly
> polling
> for results) inside Lucene Java 3.0.2. This is an significant
> performance
> improvement. It will not go to 2.9.3, as its Java 1.5 only.
>
> I would like to respin 3.0.2, the artifacts of 2.9.3 would stay as
> they are,
> as the vote seems completed. As the date of publishing was planned for
> Friday next week, we have enough time. It would be nice, if you
> could test
> again, I will post new artifacts soon!
>
> Is somebody against?
>
> Uwe
>
> -----
> 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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 6:44 PM
>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
>> be
>> released
>>
>> Alas, I have 4 envs (Windows Server 2003, OpenSolaris 2009.06,
>> CentOS 5.4,
>> OS X 10.6.2, running stress tests for 4+ hours now, and I haven't
>> hit a
> single
>> failure...
>>
>> If nobody else can repro this, I think we should not hold up the
>> release?
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>
>> wrote:
>>> No idea, its NTFS on Windows 7, 64 bit, JDK 1.4.2_19-32bit. The test
>>> now works, so cannot reproduce.
>>>
>>> Not idea what we should do!
>>>
>>> -----
>>> 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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 2:36 PM
>>>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
>>>> be released
>>>>
>>>> This looks like something new to me (doesn't ring a bell).
>>>>
>>>> It looks odd -- the assertion that's tripping would seem to
>>>> indicate
>>>> that
>>> a file
>>>> that we are copying into a CFS file (after flushing) is still
>>>> changing
>>> while we
>>>> are copying, which is not good. All files should be closed
>>>> before we
>>> build the
>>>> CFS. Strange... was this just a local hard drive / NTFS file
>>>> system,
> Uwe?
>>>>
>>>> I also can't repro, so far -- I have a while(1) stress test running
>>>> on
>>> OpenSolaris
>>>> and Windows Server 2003, but no failures yet...
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone else get this test to fail?
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>
>> wrote:
>>>>> I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure,
>>>>> which i cannot reproduce:
>>>>>
>>>>> [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
>>>>> [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed:
>>>>> 9,017 sec
>>>>> [junit]
>>>>> [junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
>>>>> [junit] Thread-45: hit exception
>>>>> [junit] java.lang.AssertionError
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.j
>>>> a
>>>>> va:195
>>>>> )
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(Document
>>>> sWr
>>>>> iter.j
>>>>> ava:672)
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal
>>>>> (IndexWriter.jav
>>>>> a:4
>>>>> 418)
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546
>>>> )
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500
>>>> )
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimi
>>>> z
>>>>> e.java
>>>>> :92)
>>>>> [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
>>>>> [junit] Testcase:
>>>>>
>> testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
>>>>> FAILED
>>>>> [junit] null
>>>>> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOpti
>>>> m
>>>>> ize.ja
>>>>> va:113)
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>>
>>>>
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(Tes
>>>> t
>>>>> Thread
>>>>> edOptimize.java:154)
>>>>> [junit] at
>>>>> org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare
>>>>> (LuceneTestCase.java:2
>>>>> 21)
>>>>> [junit]
>>>>> [junit]
>>>>> [junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
>>>>> FAILED
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is
>>>>> so,
>>>>> we can proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing
>>>>> a test build on my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing
>>>>> "volatile"
>>>>> on field in this test)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Uwe
>>>>>
>>>>> -----
>>>>> Uwe Schindler
>>>>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de
>>>>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
>>>>>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
>>>>>> be
>>>>> released
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and
>>>>>> 3.0.2
>>>>> (which
>>>>>> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
>>>>>> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding
>>>> branches.
>>>>>> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes,
>>>>>> the
>>>>> scheduled
>>>>>> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
> votes
>>>>>> from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
>>>>>> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The
>>>>>> vote
>>>>>> passes if at
>>>>> least
>>>>>> three binding +1 votes are cast.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of
>>>>>> their parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they
> are
>>>>>> equal
>>>>> except
>>>>>> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post
> the
>>>>> possible
>>>>>> release announcement soon for corrections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Artifacts can be found at:
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
>> 3.0.2-
>>>>>> take1-r
>>>>>> ev951790/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Changes:
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
>> 3.0.2-
>>>>>> take1-r
>>>>>> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
>> 3.0.2-
>>>>>> take1-r
>>>>>> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
>> 3.0.2-
>>>>>> take1-r
>>>>>> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
>> 3.0.2-
>>>>>> take1-r
>>>>>> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maven artifacts:
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
>> 3.0.2-
>>>>>> take1-r
>>>>>> ev951790/maven/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Happy testing!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de
> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Uwe Schindler
>>>>>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>>>>>> http://www.thetaphi.de
>>>>>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
Hi all,
Simon and me decided, that we want to have LUCENE-2494 (Modify
ParallelMultiSearcher to use a CompletionService instead of slowly polling
for results) inside Lucene Java 3.0.2. This is an significant performance
improvement. It will not go to 2.9.3, as its Java 1.5 only.
I would like to respin 3.0.2, the artifacts of 2.9.3 would stay as they are,
as the vote seems completed. As the date of publishing was planned for
Friday next week, we have enough time. It would be nice, if you could test
again, I will post new artifacts soon!
Is somebody against?
Uwe
-----
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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 6:44 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> released
>
> Alas, I have 4 envs (Windows Server 2003, OpenSolaris 2009.06, CentOS 5.4,
> OS X 10.6.2, running stress tests for 4+ hours now, and I haven't hit a
single
> failure...
>
> If nobody else can repro this, I think we should not hold up the release?
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> > No idea, its NTFS on Windows 7, 64 bit, JDK 1.4.2_19-32bit. The test
> > now works, so cannot reproduce.
> >
> > Not idea what we should do!
> >
> > -----
> > 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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 2:36 PM
> >> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to
> >> be released
> >>
> >> This looks like something new to me (doesn't ring a bell).
> >>
> >> It looks odd -- the assertion that's tripping would seem to indicate
> >> that
> > a file
> >> that we are copying into a CFS file (after flushing) is still
> >> changing
> > while we
> >> are copying, which is not good. All files should be closed before we
> > build the
> >> CFS. Strange... was this just a local hard drive / NTFS file system,
Uwe?
> >>
> >> I also can't repro, so far -- I have a while(1) stress test running
> >> on
> > OpenSolaris
> >> and Windows Server 2003, but no failures yet...
> >>
> >> Can anyone else get this test to fail?
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>
> wrote:
> >> > I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure,
> >> > which i cannot reproduce:
> >> >
> >> > [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
> >> > [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed:
> >> > 9,017 sec
> >> > [junit]
> >> > [junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
> >> > [junit] Thread-45: hit exception
> >> > [junit] java.lang.AssertionError
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.j
> >> a
> >> > va:195
> >> > )
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(Document
> >> sWr
> >> > iter.j
> >> > ava:672)
> >> > [junit] at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(IndexWriter.jav
> >> > a:4
> >> > 418)
> >> > [junit] at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
> >> > [junit] at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546
> >> )
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500
> >> )
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimi
> >> z
> >> > e.java
> >> > :92)
> >> > [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
> >> > [junit] Testcase:
> >> >
> testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
> >> > FAILED
> >> > [junit] null
> >> > [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOpti
> >> m
> >> > ize.ja
> >> > va:113)
> >> > [junit] at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(Tes
> >> t
> >> > Thread
> >> > edOptimize.java:154)
> >> > [junit] at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare(LuceneTestCase.java:2
> >> > 21)
> >> > [junit]
> >> > [junit]
> >> > [junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize FAILED
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is so,
> >> > we can proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing
> >> > a test build on my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
> >> >
> >> > Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing "volatile"
> >> > on field in this test)?
> >> >
> >> > Uwe
> >> >
> >> > -----
> >> > Uwe Schindler
> >> > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de
> >> > eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
> >> >> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
> >> >> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> >> >> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> >> > released
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and
> >> >> 3.0.2
> >> > (which
> >> >> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
> >> >> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding
> >> branches.
> >> >> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
> >> > scheduled
> >> >> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only
votes
> >> >> from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
> >> >> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote
> >> >> passes if at
> >> > least
> >> >> three binding +1 votes are cast.
> >> >>
> >> >> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of
> >> >> their parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they
are
> >> >> equal
> >> > except
> >> >> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post
the
> >> > possible
> >> >> release announcement soon for corrections.
> >> >>
> >> >> Artifacts can be found at:
> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> 3.0.2-
> >> >> take1-r
> >> >> ev951790/
> >> >>
> >> >> Changes:
> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> 3.0.2-
> >> >> take1-r
> >> >> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> 3.0.2-
> >> >> take1-r
> >> >> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
> >> >>
> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> 3.0.2-
> >> >> take1-r
> >> >> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> 3.0.2-
> >> >> take1-r
> >> >> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Maven artifacts:
> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-
> 3.0.2-
> >> >> take1-r
> >> >> ev951790/maven/
> >> >>
> >> >> Happy testing!
> >> >>
> >> >> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de
:-)
> >> >>
> >> >> -----
> >> >> Uwe Schindler
> >> >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> >> >> http://www.thetaphi.de
> >> >> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
Alas, I have 4 envs (Windows Server 2003, OpenSolaris 2009.06, CentOS
5.4, OS X 10.6.2, running stress tests for 4+ hours now, and I haven't
hit a single failure...
If nobody else can repro this, I think we should not hold up the release?
Mike
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> No idea, its NTFS on Windows 7, 64 bit, JDK 1.4.2_19-32bit. The test now
> works, so cannot reproduce.
>
> Not idea what we should do!
>
> -----
> 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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 2:36 PM
>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
>> released
>>
>> This looks like something new to me (doesn't ring a bell).
>>
>> It looks odd -- the assertion that's tripping would seem to indicate that
> a file
>> that we are copying into a CFS file (after flushing) is still changing
> while we
>> are copying, which is not good. All files should be closed before we
> build the
>> CFS. Strange... was this just a local hard drive / NTFS file system, Uwe?
>>
>> I also can't repro, so far -- I have a while(1) stress test running on
> OpenSolaris
>> and Windows Server 2003, but no failures yet...
>>
>> Can anyone else get this test to fail?
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
>> > I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure, which i
>> > cannot reproduce:
>> >
>> > [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
>> > [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 9,017
>> > sec
>> > [junit]
>> > [junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
>> > [junit] Thread-45: hit exception
>> > [junit] java.lang.AssertionError
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.ja
>> > va:195
>> > )
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(Document
>> sWr
>> > iter.j
>> > ava:672)
>> > [junit] at
>> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(IndexWriter.java:4
>> > 418)
>> > [junit] at
>> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
>> > [junit] at
>> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546)
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500)
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimi
>> z
>> > e.java
>> > :92)
>> > [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
>> > [junit] Testcase:
>> > testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
>> > FAILED
>> > [junit] null
>> > [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOpti
>> m
>> > ize.ja
>> > va:113)
>> > [junit] at
>> >
>> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(Test
>> > Thread
>> > edOptimize.java:154)
>> > [junit] at
>> > org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare(LuceneTestCase.java:221)
>> > [junit]
>> > [junit]
>> > [junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize FAILED
>> >
>> >
>> > Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is so, we
>> > can proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing a test
>> > build on my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
>> >
>> > Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing "volatile" on
>> > field in this test)?
>> >
>> > Uwe
>> >
>> > -----
>> > Uwe Schindler
>> > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>> > http://www.thetaphi.de
>> > eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>> >
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
>> >> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
>> >> To: general@lucene.apache.org
>> >> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
>> > released
>> >>
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and
>> >> 3.0.2
>> > (which
>> >> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
>> >> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding
>> branches.
>> >> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
>> > scheduled
>> >> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only votes
>> >> from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
>> >> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote
>> >> passes if at
>> > least
>> >> three binding +1 votes are cast.
>> >>
>> >> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of
>> >> their parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are
>> >> equal
>> > except
>> >> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
>> > possible
>> >> release announcement soon for corrections.
>> >>
>> >> Artifacts can be found at:
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> >> take1-r
>> >> ev951790/
>> >>
>> >> Changes:
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> >> take1-r
>> >> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> >> take1-r
>> >> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
>> >>
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> >> take1-r
>> >> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> >> take1-r
>> >> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
>> >>
>> >> Maven artifacts:
>> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> >> take1-r
>> >> ev951790/maven/
>> >>
>> >> Happy testing!
>> >>
>> >> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de :-)
>> >>
>> >> -----
>> >> Uwe Schindler
>> >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>> >> http://www.thetaphi.de
>> >> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
No idea, its NTFS on Windows 7, 64 bit, JDK 1.4.2_19-32bit. The test now
works, so cannot reproduce.
Not idea what we should do!
-----
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: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 2:36 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> released
>
> This looks like something new to me (doesn't ring a bell).
>
> It looks odd -- the assertion that's tripping would seem to indicate that
a file
> that we are copying into a CFS file (after flushing) is still changing
while we
> are copying, which is not good. All files should be closed before we
build the
> CFS. Strange... was this just a local hard drive / NTFS file system, Uwe?
>
> I also can't repro, so far -- I have a while(1) stress test running on
OpenSolaris
> and Windows Server 2003, but no failures yet...
>
> Can anyone else get this test to fail?
>
> Mike
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> > I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure, which i
> > cannot reproduce:
> >
> > [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
> > [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 9,017
> > sec
> > [junit]
> > [junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
> > [junit] Thread-45: hit exception
> > [junit] java.lang.AssertionError
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.ja
> > va:195
> > )
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(Document
> sWr
> > iter.j
> > ava:672)
> > [junit] at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(IndexWriter.java:4
> > 418)
> > [junit] at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
> > [junit] at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546)
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500)
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimi
> z
> > e.java
> > :92)
> > [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
> > [junit] Testcase:
> > testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
> > FAILED
> > [junit] null
> > [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOpti
> m
> > ize.ja
> > va:113)
> > [junit] at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(Test
> > Thread
> > edOptimize.java:154)
> > [junit] at
> > org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare(LuceneTestCase.java:221)
> > [junit]
> > [junit]
> > [junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize FAILED
> >
> >
> > Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is so, we
> > can proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing a test
> > build on my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
> >
> > Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing "volatile" on
> > field in this test)?
> >
> > Uwe
> >
> > -----
> > Uwe Schindler
> > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> > http://www.thetaphi.de
> > eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
> >> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
> >> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> >> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> > released
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and
> >> 3.0.2
> > (which
> >> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release
> >> announcement), build from revision 951790 of the corresponding
> branches.
> >> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
> > scheduled
> >> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only votes
> >> from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the
> >> release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote
> >> passes if at
> > least
> >> three binding +1 votes are cast.
> >>
> >> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of
> >> their parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are
> >> equal
> > except
> >> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
> > possible
> >> release announcement soon for corrections.
> >>
> >> Artifacts can be found at:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> >> take1-r
> >> ev951790/
> >>
> >> Changes:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> >> take1-r
> >> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> >> take1-r
> >> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> >> take1-r
> >> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> >> take1-r
> >> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
> >>
> >> Maven artifacts:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> >> take1-r
> >> ev951790/maven/
> >>
> >> Happy testing!
> >>
> >> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de :-)
> >>
> >> -----
> >> Uwe Schindler
> >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> >> http://www.thetaphi.de
> >> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >>
> >
> >
> >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
Posted by Michael McCandless <lu...@mikemccandless.com>.
This looks like something new to me (doesn't ring a bell).
It looks odd -- the assertion that's tripping would seem to indicate
that a file that we are copying into a CFS file (after flushing) is
still changing while we are copying, which is not good. All files
should be closed before we build the CFS. Strange... was this just a
local hard drive / NTFS file system, Uwe?
I also can't repro, so far -- I have a while(1) stress test running on
OpenSolaris and Windows Server 2003, but no failures yet...
Can anyone else get this test to fail?
Mike
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure, which i
> cannot reproduce:
>
> [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
> [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 9,017 sec
> [junit]
> [junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
> [junit] Thread-45: hit exception
> [junit] java.lang.AssertionError
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.java:195
> )
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(DocumentsWriter.j
> ava:672)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(IndexWriter.java:4418)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimize.java
> :92)
> [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
> [junit] Testcase:
> testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
> FAILED
> [junit] null
> [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOptimize.ja
> va:113)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(TestThread
> edOptimize.java:154)
> [junit] at
> org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare(LuceneTestCase.java:221)
> [junit]
> [junit]
> [junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize FAILED
>
>
> Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is so, we can
> proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing a test build on
> my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
>
> Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing "volatile" on field
> in this test)?
>
> Uwe
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
>> To: general@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
> released
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
> (which
>> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release announcement),
>> build from revision 951790 of the corresponding branches.
>> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
> scheduled
>> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only votes from
>> Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the release
>> candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at
> least
>> three binding +1 votes are cast.
>>
>> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of their
>> parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are equal
> except
>> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
> possible
>> release announcement soon for corrections.
>>
>> Artifacts can be found at:
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> take1-r
>> ev951790/
>>
>> Changes:
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> take1-r
>> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> take1-r
>> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> take1-r
>> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> take1-r
>> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
>>
>> Maven artifacts:
>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
>> take1-r
>> ev951790/maven/
>>
>> Happy testing!
>>
>> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de :-)
>>
>> -----
>> Uwe Schindler
>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>> http://www.thetaphi.de
>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>>
>
>
>
RE: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be released
Posted by Uwe Schindler <uw...@thetaphi.de>.
I ran the tests on my computer and with 2.9.3 I got a failure, which i
cannot reproduce:
[junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 9,017 sec
[junit]
[junit] ------------- Standard Output ---------------
[junit] Thread-45: hit exception
[junit] java.lang.AssertionError
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.CompoundFileWriter.close(CompoundFileWriter.java:195
)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.DocumentsWriter.createCompoundFile(DocumentsWriter.j
ava:672)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlushInternal(IndexWriter.java:4418)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.doFlush(IndexWriter.java:4264)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.flush(IndexWriter.java:4255)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2546)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.addDocument(IndexWriter.java:2500)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize$1.run(TestThreadedOptimize.java
:92)
[junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
[junit] Testcase:
testThreadedOptimize(org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize):
FAILED
[junit] null
[junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.runTest(TestThreadedOptimize.ja
va:113)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize.testThreadedOptimize(TestThread
edOptimize.java:154)
[junit] at
org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.runBare(LuceneTestCase.java:221)
[junit]
[junit]
[junit] Test org.apache.lucene.index.TestThreadedOptimize FAILED
Maybe it's just the bug in the test we already know, if this is so, we can
proceed with releasing. It happened in JDK 1.4.2 when doing a test build on
my windows machine of 2.9.3-src.zip.
Mike, maybe it's an already fixed test-only bug (missing "volatile" on field
in this test)?
Uwe
-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de]
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:21 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 artifacts to be
released
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
(which
> both have the same bug fix level, functionality and release announcement),
> build from revision 951790 of the corresponding branches.
> Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the
scheduled
> release date for both versions is Friday, June 18th, 2010. Only votes from
> Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to check the release
> candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at
least
> three binding +1 votes are cast.
>
> We planned the parallel release with one announcement because of their
> parallel development / bug fix level to emphasize that they are equal
except
> deprecation removal and Java 5 since major version 3. I will post the
possible
> release announcement soon for corrections.
>
> Artifacts can be found at:
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> take1-r
> ev951790/
>
> Changes:
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> take1-r
> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Changes.html
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> take1-r
> ev951790/changes-2.9.3/Contrib-Changes.html
>
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> take1-r
> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Changes.html
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> take1-r
> ev951790/changes-3.0.2/Contrib-Changes.html
>
> Maven artifacts:
> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-2.9.3-3.0.2-
> take1-r
> ev951790/maven/
>
> Happy testing!
>
> P.S.: I already tested the latest 3.0.2 artifacts with pangaea.de :-)
>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
>