[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14467?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17117822#comment-17117822
]
Michael Gibney commented on SOLR-14467:
---------------------------------------
I just uploaded a patch that I think covers everything we discussed above.
There's a nocommit marking an edge case problem for distributed merging. I
think this happens for the case buckets are merged without any shard having
initialized a bucket. If all the shards are implied (counts of zero), then
there's no way to know whether the term is allBuckets or a term bucket, and
it's not possible to choose the proper {{externalize(boolean)}} implementation.
... although, as I write this, I _think_ maybe we _can_ choose ... but I'm not
sure how to test/verify this. I'm thinking that any term bucket that is merged
is guaranteed to have at least one "materialized" (i.e., not "implied/empty")
{{BucketData}}, which would identify that mergeResult as being for a term
bucket, not allBuckets. But the {{allBuckets}} bucket is present (and gets
merged) regardless of whether there's any "materialized" content there, so if
all the merged buckets are all "implied/empty", perhaps we can infer that we're
dealing with the "allBuckets" bucket?
> inconsistent server errors combining relatedness() with allBuckets:true
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-14467
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14467
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Components: Facet Module
> Reporter: Chris M. Hostetter
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: SOLR-14467.patch, SOLR-14467.patch,
> SOLR-14467_test.patch, SOLR-14467_test.patch
>
>
> While working on randomized testing for SOLR-13132 i discovered a variety of
> different ways that JSON Faceting's "allBuckets" option can fail when
> combined with the "relatedness()" function.
> I haven't found a trivial way to manual reproduce this, but i have been able
> to trigger the failures with a trivial patch to {{TestCloudJSONFacetSKG}}
> which i will attach.
> Based on the nature of the failures it looks like it may have something to do
> with multiple segments of different sizes, and or resizing the SlotAccs ?
> The relatedness() function doesn't have much (any?) existing tests in place
> that leverage "allBuckets" so this is probably a bug that has always existed
> -- it's possible it may be excessively cumbersome to fix and we might
> nee/wnat to just document that incompatibility and add some code to try and
> detect if the user combines these options and if so fail with a 400 error?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
