This is a bit late, but I have a draft release notes: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/ReleaseNote9_9_0
Please make any changes you want. There are like 6 months of changes, so I tried to be brief. I probably missed some good stuff. - Houston On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 7:24 PM Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org> wrote: > Seriously, awesome debugging!!! > > I saw the lack of logs but was looking too much into the fact that it was > always failing in the smoke tester. Great find! > > If we need to do a respin, this will make it a lot easier haha. > > - Houston > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 6:29 PM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Way to go Pierre! >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:04 AM Pierre Salagnac < >> pierre.salag...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > I tried to run smoke tests for 9.9, and they failed several times in a >> row >> > for me because of flaky logging tests. Since we also hit this failure >> > frequently in our CI, I spent some time looking at test execution. >> > >> > I figured out that TestLogWatcher systematically fails when it is >> executed >> > after PackageManagerCLITest *in the same JVM*. By default, gradle is >> likely >> > to spawn several JVMs, and unless you are unlucky, these two tests will >> run >> > in different ones and you won't see any issue. (I can't say whether >> running >> > tests from the python script when validating the release has any impact >> on >> > test ordering and number of JVMs). >> > >> > On branch_9x, I have a good repro rate (50% ?) locally by running the >> > following command. It's still not 100% because gradle can run tests in >> any >> > order. I'm not sure how to force that. >> > >> > ./gradlew test --tests PackageManagerCLITest --tests TestLogWatcher >> > -Ptests.jvms=1 >> > >> > (note that's necessary to force the number of forked JVMs to 1 so tests >> are >> > executed in a row in the same process). >> > >> > >> > Now, the root cause seems pretty obvious. Class PackageTool invokes >> > "Configurator.setRootLevel(Level.OFF)" and never reverts that. Any test >> > that later looks at was logged is very likely to fail. >> > Not sure what is the best path for a fix. Shutting down all logging >> (even >> > in a CLI tool) seems to be a bad practice to me... >> > >> > >> > Le mar. 15 juil. 2025 à 23:53, Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org> a >> > écrit : >> > >> > > Hey everyone, >> > > >> > > Update on the 9.9 release. >> > > >> > > There are two issues that popped up after fixing the >> > > ParallelHttpShardHandler bug: >> > > >> > > - https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/3428 (9.x specific, >> unrelated >> > to >> > > the bug, but found while beasting tests) >> > > - https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/3429 (Fixes bug introduced >> into >> > > HttpShardHandler) >> > > >> > > Both should be good to go after quick reviews. >> > > >> > > The other big issue we are facing is regarding the smoke tester and >> > > buildAndPushRelease scripts. Both of these have started having issues >> > > regarding running tests that watch logs. (Like TestLogWatcher and >> > > RankFieldTest). Both of these watch for certain log events, and both >> of >> > > them fail when running the tests via the python scripts. We can see >> this >> > > has been happening since May 9th on the Apache Jenkins instances, but >> > there >> > > is nothing introduced in Solr at the time that would explain it. >> > > https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/Solr-Smoketest-9.x/ >> > > >> > > I am having a very hard time replicating this (outside of doing the >> full >> > > release process), but I'll hopefully have it solved by the time those >> 2 >> > PRs >> > > are approved, merged, and backported. >> > > >> > > - Houston >> > > >> > > On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 10:14 AM Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Fair enough, I was waiting to cut the branch since we weren't ready >> to >> > do >> > > > the release yet. But I'll start that process now. >> > > > >> > > > - Houston >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 6:39 AM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> I noticed recently there seems to be no release branch separation, >> > which >> > > >> is >> > > >> designed to bring about more stability. >> > > >> >> > > >> I've been waiting on merging >> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5707 >> > > >> (a 4 digit JIRA from 2014), "Lucene Expressions for Solr" because >> the >> > > >> Lucene 9.12.2 bug fix includes a bug fix I worked on that >> > significantly >> > > >> improves the usefulness of SOLR-5707. Notwithstanding a couple >> > ignored >> > > >> tests (waiting for 9.12.2), that PR is ready for review. Even has >> a >> > new >> > > >> ref guide page just for it. >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 12:07 AM Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org >> > >> > > >> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> > This is a big blocker: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/3398 >> > > >> > >> > > >> > And it needs some more eyes, but hopefully we can finish it out >> > early >> > > >> this >> > > >> > week. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > We also need to actually do the lucene upgrade which I can do >> > tomorrow >> > > >> > morning. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > After those two are done, I'll create an RC. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > - Houston >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 4:26 PM Anshum Gupta <ans...@apache.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > Hi everyone, >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Now that the Lucene release is done, is there something that is >> > > >> stopping >> > > >> > us >> > > >> > > from moving forward with this release? If not, let's build an >> RC >> > > early >> > > >> > next >> > > >> > > week. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -Anshum >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:12 PM David Smiley < >> dsmi...@apache.org> >> > > >> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Yes, I _just_ back ported a Lucene fix to 9.12.2 that would >> make >> > > >> > > > finishing/committing >> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5707 >> > > >> > > > (using >> > > >> > > > Lucene Expressions module in Solr) way more useful. >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 5:54 PM Houston Putman < >> > > hous...@apache.org> >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > We might also want to wait for the next Lucene 9.12.2 >> release, >> > > >> which >> > > >> > > > should >> > > >> > > > > hopefully happen soon? >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > - Houston >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 8:51 AM Bruno Roustant < >> > > >> > > bruno.roust...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > +1 Thanks Houston! >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > Le mer. 11 juin 2025 à 00:29, Jan Høydahl < >> > > >> jan....@cominvent.com> >> > > >> > a >> > > >> > > > > écrit >> > > >> > > > > > : >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Great plan. +1 >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > 9. juni 2025 kl. 23:14 skrev Houston Putman < >> > > >> > hous...@apache.org >> > > >> > > >: >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Hey everyone, >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > It's been a while since the last minor release and >> the >> > > >> > changelog >> > > >> > > > > looks >> > > >> > > > > > > > pretty good to get the next one in. >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > I volunteer to do it probably sometime next week >> unless >> > > >> anyone >> > > >> > > > > objects. >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > - Houston >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > >> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> > > >> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
