I think the ParallelHttpShardHandler bit is worth mentioning, as the perf-bug we've fixed there was pretty significant. Folks might've tried PHSH and rejected it for performance, and it's good to signal to those folks that the situation is much much better now.
I think removing the "V2"-related bullet point is fair; most folks interacting with v2 will be using a client and so the "Accept" header is likely an implementation detail from that perspective. Best, Jason On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 9:22 AM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> wrote: > > Thanks. I tweaked some wording. > > At risk of being the "bad guy", I think a number of those lower Highlights > aren't highlight-worthy. Like say incremental improvements to V2. Or > fixing a bug in ParallelHttpShardHandler. Or Jetty graceful shutdown. > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 2:57 PM Houston Putman <hous...@apache.org> wrote: > > > 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 > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org
