Skip to content

Upgrading lucene version to 10.5.0#22322

Merged
jainankitk merged 6 commits into
opensearch-project:mainfrom
harshavamsi:upgrade-lucene-10.5.0
Jun 29, 2026
Merged

Upgrading lucene version to 10.5.0#22322
jainankitk merged 6 commits into
opensearch-project:mainfrom
harshavamsi:upgrade-lucene-10.5.0

Conversation

@harshavamsi

@harshavamsi harshavamsi commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Lucene has released 10.5.0

Related Issues

Resolves #[Issue number to be closed when this PR is merged]

Check List

  • Functionality includes testing.
  • API changes companion pull request created, if applicable.
  • Public documentation issue/PR created, if applicable.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

@harshavamsi harshavamsi force-pushed the upgrade-lucene-10.5.0 branch from 2c3eded to c2560f8 Compare June 25, 2026 17:47
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 25, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR Code Analyzer ❗

AI-powered 'Code-Diff-Analyzer' found issues on commit 7967174.

PathLineSeverityDescription
gradle/libs.versions.toml3highLucene dependency version bumped from 10.4.0 to 10.5.0. Per mandatory supply chain policy, all dependency version changes must be flagged regardless of apparent legitimacy. Maintainers should verify the new SHA1 hashes against official Apache Lucene release checksums to confirm artifact authenticity before merging.

The table above displays the top 10 most important findings.

Total: 1 | Critical: 0 | High: 1 | Medium: 0 | Low: 0

Pull Requests Author(s): Please update your Pull Request according to the report above.

Repository Maintainer(s): You can bypass diff analyzer by adding label skip-diff-analyzer after reviewing the changes carefully, then re-run failed actions. To re-enable the analyzer, remove the label, then re-run all actions.

⚠️ Note: The Code-Diff-Analyzer helps protect against potentially harmful code patterns. Please ensure you have thoroughly reviewed the changes beforehand.

Thanks.

@harshavamsi harshavamsi added the skip-diff-analyzer Maintainer to skip code-diff-analyzer check, after reviewing issues in AI analysis. label Jun 25, 2026
@prudhvigodithi

prudhvigodithi commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thanks @harshavamsi

@harshavamsi
Upgrading lucene version to 10.5.0
2338743 
Signed-off-by: Harsha Vamsi Kalluri <harshavamsi096@gmail.com>
@harshavamsi
Fix last test
6a9fd91 
Signed-off-by: Harsha Vamsi Kalluri <harshavamsi096@gmail.com>
@harshavamsi harshavamsi force-pushed the upgrade-lucene-10.5.0 branch from 7967174 to 6a9fd91 Compare June 25, 2026 18:44
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 25, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

(Review updated until commit 3ae5014)

Here are some key observations to aid the review process:

🧪 PR contains tests
🔒 No security concerns identified
✅ No TODO sections
🔀 No multiple PR themes
⚡ Recommended focus areas for review

Performance Concern

The new nextClearBit implementation iterates bit-by-bit via get(i), which is O(n) and far slower than the underlying FixedBitSet.nextClearBit it overrides. Since CombinedBitSet is used in hot paths (e.g., live-docs filtering), this could materially regress performance on large segments. Consider leveraging the underlying bitsets' native nextClearBit or word-level operations instead of a per-bit loop.

 
@Override
public int nextClearBit(int start, int upperBound) {
    assert start >= 0 && start < length() : "start=" + start + " numBits=" + length();
    assert upperBound >= start && upperBound <= length() : "upperBound=" + upperBound + " numBits=" + length();

    for (int i = start; i < upperBound; i++) {
        if (get(i) == false) {
            return i;
        }
    }
    return DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
}
Possible Issue

The assertion start < length() will trigger when start == length(), but Lucene's nextClearBit contract typically allows start == length() (or callers may reach it at the boundary) and should return NO_MORE_DOCS. The stricter precondition can cause AssertionErrors in tests/edge cases that previously worked with FixedBitSet.nextClearBit.

 
assert start >= 0 && start < length() : "start=" + start + " numBits=" + length();
assert upperBound >= start && upperBound <= length() : "upperBound=" + upperBound + " numBits=" + length();

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 25, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Latest suggestions up to 3ae5014

Explore these optional code suggestions:

CategorySuggestion                                                                                                                                    Impact
Possible issue
Fix nextClearBit return value semantics

The nextClearBit contract typically returns upperBound (not NO_MORE_DOCS) when no
clear bit is found within the range, matching FixedBitSet/BitSet semantics in
Lucene. Returning NO_MORE_DOCS (Integer.MAX_VALUE) may break callers that expect the
standard contract and use the result as an index bound.

server/src/main/java/org/opensearch/lucene/util/CombinedBitSet.java [146-157]

 @Override
 public int nextClearBit(int start, int upperBound) {
     assert start >= 0 && start < length() : "start=" + start + " numBits=" + length();
     assert upperBound >= start && upperBound <= length() : "upperBound=" + upperBound + " numBits=" + length();
 
     for (int i = start; i < upperBound; i++) {
         if (get(i) == false) {
             return i;
         }
     }
-    return DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
+    return upperBound;
 }
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8

__

Why: The Lucene BitSet.nextClearBit contract returns the upperBound when no clear bit is found, not NO_MORE_DOCS. The test in CombinedBitSetTests compares against a reference BitSet implementation, so this discrepancy could cause test failures and incorrect behavior for callers relying on standard semantics.

Medium

Previous suggestions

Suggestions up to commit e709c4a
CategorySuggestion                                                                                                                                    Impact
Possible issue
Return upperBound when no clear bit found

The nextClearBit contract in Lucene's BitSet typically requires returning upperBound
(not DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS) when no clear bit is found in the range [start,
upperBound). Returning NO_MORE_DOCS (Integer.MAX_VALUE) can break callers that
compare the result against upperBound or use it as an index, leading to subtle
correctness issues.

server/src/main/java/org/opensearch/lucene/util/CombinedBitSet.java [146-157]

 @Override
 public int nextClearBit(int start, int upperBound) {
     assert start >= 0 && start < length() : "start=" + start + " numBits=" + length();
     assert upperBound >= start && upperBound <= length() : "upperBound=" + upperBound + " numBits=" + length();
 
     for (int i = start; i < upperBound; i++) {
         if (get(i) == false) {
             return i;
         }
     }
-    return DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
+    return upperBound;
 }
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7

__

Why: Lucene's BitSet.nextClearBit contract returns NO_MORE_DOCS when no clear bit is found, so the original implementation may actually be correct. However, the suggestion raises a valid concern worth verifying against the Lucene contract.

Medium
General
Optimize clear-bit scan beyond linear loop

The linear bit-by-bit scan is O(n) and can be very inefficient for large bitsets,
especially since CombinedBitSet represents an intersection of two bitsets used in
filtered/deleted document iteration. Consider leveraging the underlying bitsets'
word-level operations or nextClearBit of the wrapped bitsets to speed this up.

server/src/main/java/org/opensearch/lucene/util/CombinedBitSet.java [151-155]

+for (int i = start; i < upperBound; i++) {
+    if (get(i) == false) {
+        return i;
+    }
+}
 
-
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 3

__

Why: The suggestion identifies a valid performance concern but provides identical improved_code to the existing_code, offering no concrete improvement.

Low
Suggestions up to commit 99bd312
CategorySuggestion                                                                                                                                    Impact
Possible issue
Fix return value contract for nextClearBit

The contract of nextClearBit typically requires returning upperBound (not
NO_MORE_DOCS) when no clear bit is found within [start, upperBound), matching
Lucene's FixedBitSet.nextClearBit semantics. Returning NO_MORE_DOCS may break
callers that rely on the standard contract and compare the result against
upperBound.

server/src/main/java/org/opensearch/lucene/util/CombinedBitSet.java [146-157]

 @Override
 public int nextClearBit(int start, int upperBound) {
     assert start >= 0 && start < length() : "start=" + start + " numBits=" + length();
     assert upperBound >= start && upperBound <= length() : "upperBound=" + upperBound + " numBits=" + length();
 
     for (int i = start; i < upperBound; i++) {
         if (get(i) == false) {
             return i;
         }
     }
-    return DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
+    return upperBound;
 }
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8

__

Why: Lucene's BitSet.nextClearBit contract is to return DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS when no clear bit is found, not upperBound. Actually checking Lucene's FixedBitSet, nextClearBit returns NO_MORE_DOCS. The suggestion may be incorrect, but it raises a valid concern about contract compliance worth verifying.

Medium
Suggestions up to commit 6a9fd91
CategorySuggestion                                                                                                                                    Impact
Possible issue
Fix return value contract for nextClearBit

The contract of nextClearBit in Lucene's BitSet typically expects the method to
return upperBound (not NO_MORE_DOCS) when no clear bit is found within [start,
upperBound). Returning DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS may violate the contract and
cause incorrect behavior in callers that compare the result against upperBound.

server/src/main/java/org/opensearch/lucene/util/CombinedBitSet.java [146-157]

 @Override
 public int nextClearBit(int start, int upperBound) {
     assert start >= 0 && start < length() : "start=" + start + " numBits=" + length();
     assert upperBound >= start && upperBound <= length() : "upperBound=" + upperBound + " numBits=" + length();
 
     for (int i = start; i < upperBound; i++) {
         if (get(i) == false) {
             return i;
         }
     }
-    return DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
+    return upperBound;
 }
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8

__

Why: Lucene's BitSet.nextClearBit contract returns upperBound (or DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS only when at the end) when no clear bit is found in range; returning NO_MORE_DOCS here could violate the contract and cause subtle bugs in callers.

Medium
General
Avoid allocating empty array each call

Replacing Fields.EMPTY_ARRAY with new Fields[0] allocates a new empty array on every
call. Define and reuse a constant empty Fields[] array (or keep using a shared
constant) to avoid unnecessary allocations on hot paths.

server/src/main/java/org/opensearch/index/query/MoreLikeThisQueryBuilder.java [1131]

-return likeFields.toArray(new Fields[0]);
+return likeFields.toArray(EMPTY_FIELDS_ARRAY);
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 2

__

Why: toArray(new Fields[0]) is actually the JDK-recommended idiom and is often as fast or faster than passing a presized array due to JIT optimizations; the suggested change is a marginal micro-optimization.

Low

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

❌ Gradle check result for 6a9fd91: null

Please examine the workflow log, locate, and copy-paste the failure(s) below, then iterate to green. Is the failure a flaky test unrelated to your change?

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

❕ Gradle check result for 6a9fd91: UNSTABLE

Please review all flaky tests that succeeded after retry and create an issue if one does not already exist to track the flaky failure.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 25, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 73.40%. Comparing base (2bc7dc6) to head (3ae5014).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...ava/org/opensearch/lucene/util/CombinedBitSet.java 66.66% 0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files 
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #22322      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     73.34%   73.40%   +0.05%     
- Complexity    76039    76088      +49     
============================================
  Files          6076     6076              
  Lines        345494   345500       +6     
  Branches      49729    49732       +3     
============================================
+ Hits         253402   253608     +206     
+ Misses        71885    71707     -178     
+ Partials      20207    20185      -22

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@opensearch-ci-bot opensearch-ci-bot mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2026
Open
@prudhvigodithi

prudhvigodithi commented Jun 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@harshavamsi can you check the red CI's?

@prudhvigodithi

prudhvigodithi commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Similar to our past Lucene version increments #16366 (comment) we can run one benchmarks before merge.

@prudhvigodithi

prudhvigodithi commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

{"run-benchmark-test": "id_3"}

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Persistent review updated to latest commit 99bd312

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The Jenkins job url is https://build.ci.opensearch.org/job/benchmark-pull-request/7932/ . Final results will be published once the job is completed.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✅ Gradle check result for 99bd312: SUCCESS

@opensearch-ci-bot

opensearch-ci-bot commented Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Benchmark Results

Benchmark Results for Job: https://build.ci.opensearch.org/job/benchmark-pull-request/7932/

Metric Task Value Unit
Cumulative indexing time of primary shards 0 min
Min cumulative indexing time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative indexing time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative indexing time across primary shards 0 min
Cumulative indexing throttle time of primary shards 0 min
Min cumulative indexing throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative indexing throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative indexing throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Cumulative merge time of primary shards 0 min
Cumulative merge count of primary shards 0
Min cumulative merge time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative merge time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative merge time across primary shards 0 min
Cumulative merge throttle time of primary shards 0 min
Min cumulative merge throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative merge throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative merge throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Cumulative refresh time of primary shards 0 min
Cumulative refresh count of primary shards 2
Min cumulative refresh time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative refresh time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative refresh time across primary shards 0 min
Cumulative flush time of primary shards 0 min
Cumulative flush count of primary shards 1
Min cumulative flush time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative flush time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative flush time across primary shards 0 min
Total Young Gen GC time 0.871 s
Total Young Gen GC count 17
Total Old Gen GC time 0 s
Total Old Gen GC count 0
Doc count 1.16e+08
Store size 22.1576 GB
Translog size 5.12227e-08 GB
Heap used for segments 0 MB
Heap used for doc values 0 MB
Heap used for terms 0 MB
Heap used for norms 0 MB
Heap used for points 0 MB
Heap used for stored fields 0 MB
Segment count 9
100th percentile latency wait-for-snapshot-recovery 120001 ms
100th percentile service time wait-for-snapshot-recovery 120001 ms
error rate wait-for-snapshot-recovery 100 %
100th percentile latency check-cluster-health 120014 ms
100th percentile service time check-cluster-health 120014 ms
error rate check-cluster-health 100 %
100th percentile latency wait-until-merges-finish 120000 ms
100th percentile service time wait-until-merges-finish 120000 ms
error rate wait-until-merges-finish 100 %
50th percentile latency default 11.9581 ms
90th percentile latency default 12.8612 ms
99th percentile latency default 14.5605 ms
100th percentile latency default 14.651 ms
50th percentile service time default 11.9581 ms
90th percentile service time default 12.8612 ms
99th percentile service time default 14.5605 ms
100th percentile service time default 14.651 ms
error rate default 100 %
50th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp 10.5744 ms
90th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp 11.1294 ms
99th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp 14.4435 ms
100th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp 17.1016 ms
50th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp 10.5744 ms
90th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp 11.1294 ms
99th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp 14.4435 ms
100th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp 17.1016 ms
error rate desc_sort_timestamp 100 %
50th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp 9.55991 ms
90th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp 10.0281 ms
99th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp 11.0052 ms
100th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp 11.0305 ms
50th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp 9.55991 ms
90th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp 10.0281 ms
99th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp 11.0052 ms
100th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp 11.0305 ms
error rate asc_sort_timestamp 100 %
50th percentile latency desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 7.99355 ms
90th percentile latency desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 8.51192 ms
99th percentile latency desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 8.88941 ms
100th percentile latency desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 8.90008 ms
50th percentile service time desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 7.99355 ms
90th percentile service time desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 8.51192 ms
99th percentile service time desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 8.88941 ms
100th percentile service time desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 8.90008 ms
error rate desc_sort_with_after_timestamp 100 %
50th percentile latency asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 9.21388 ms
90th percentile latency asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 9.73278 ms
99th percentile latency asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 10.9102 ms
100th percentile latency asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 10.9915 ms
50th percentile service time asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 9.21388 ms
90th percentile service time asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 9.73278 ms
99th percentile service time asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 10.9102 ms
100th percentile service time asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 10.9915 ms
error rate asc_sort_with_after_timestamp 100 %
50th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 8.88072 ms
90th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.36625 ms
99th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.78918 ms
100th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.82765 ms
50th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 8.88072 ms
90th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.36625 ms
99th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.78918 ms
100th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.82765 ms
error rate desc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 100 %
50th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 8.28267 ms
90th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.10059 ms
99th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.73494 ms
100th percentile latency desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.95745 ms
50th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 8.28267 ms
90th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.10059 ms
99th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.73494 ms
100th percentile service time desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.95745 ms
error rate desc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 100 %
50th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.24268 ms
90th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.6972 ms
99th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 10.1232 ms
100th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 10.1648 ms
50th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.24268 ms
90th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 9.6972 ms
99th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 10.1232 ms
100th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 10.1648 ms
error rate asc_sort_timestamp_can_match_shortcut 100 %
50th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 8.92445 ms
90th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.38399 ms
99th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 12.8887 ms
100th percentile latency asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 14.7058 ms
50th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 8.92445 ms
90th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 9.38399 ms
99th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 12.8887 ms
100th percentile service time asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 14.7058 ms
error rate asc_sort_timestamp_no_can_match_shortcut 100 %
50th percentile latency term 6.69886 ms
90th percentile latency term 7.1053 ms
99th percentile latency term 7.70683 ms
100th percentile latency term 7.74263 ms
50th percentile service time term 6.69886 ms
90th percentile service time term 7.1053 ms
99th percentile service time term 7.70683 ms
100th percentile service time term 7.74263 ms
error rate term 100 %
50th percentile latency multi_terms-keyword 9.09349 ms
90th percentile latency multi_terms-keyword 9.92837 ms
99th percentile latency multi_terms-keyword 12.3366 ms
100th percentile latency multi_terms-keyword 13.8711 ms
50th percentile service time multi_terms-keyword 9.09349 ms
90th percentile service time multi_terms-keyword 9.92837 ms
99th percentile service time multi_terms-keyword 12.3366 ms
100th percentile service time multi_terms-keyword 13.8711 ms
error rate multi_terms-keyword 100 %
Min Throughput keyword-terms 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput keyword-terms 2.01 ops/s
Median Throughput keyword-terms 2.01 ops/s
Max Throughput keyword-terms 2.02 ops/s
50th percentile latency keyword-terms 11.1892 ms
90th percentile latency keyword-terms 12.6677 ms
99th percentile latency keyword-terms 13.7396 ms
100th percentile latency keyword-terms 13.8277 ms
50th percentile service time keyword-terms 9.92925 ms
90th percentile service time keyword-terms 11.1356 ms
99th percentile service time keyword-terms 12.3579 ms
100th percentile service time keyword-terms 12.4152 ms
error rate keyword-terms 0 %
Min Throughput keyword-terms-low-cardinality 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput keyword-terms-low-cardinality 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput keyword-terms-low-cardinality 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput keyword-terms-low-cardinality 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency keyword-terms-low-cardinality 7.89029 ms
90th percentile latency keyword-terms-low-cardinality 9.06453 ms
99th percentile latency keyword-terms-low-cardinality 9.7847 ms
100th percentile latency keyword-terms-low-cardinality 10.1649 ms
50th percentile service time keyword-terms-low-cardinality 6.27956 ms
90th percentile service time keyword-terms-low-cardinality 7.44493 ms
99th percentile service time keyword-terms-low-cardinality 8.32856 ms
100th percentile service time keyword-terms-low-cardinality 8.65285 ms
error rate keyword-terms-low-cardinality 0 %
Min Throughput composite-terms 2 ops/s
Mean Throughput composite-terms 2 ops/s
Median Throughput composite-terms 2 ops/s
Max Throughput composite-terms 2 ops/s
50th percentile latency composite-terms 164.729 ms
90th percentile latency composite-terms 201.75 ms
99th percentile latency composite-terms 212.556 ms
100th percentile latency composite-terms 215.493 ms
50th percentile service time composite-terms 163.273 ms
90th percentile service time composite-terms 200.747 ms
99th percentile service time composite-terms 211.29 ms
100th percentile service time composite-terms 214.021 ms
error rate composite-terms 0 %
Min Throughput composite_terms-keyword 2 ops/s
Mean Throughput composite_terms-keyword 2.01 ops/s
Median Throughput composite_terms-keyword 2.01 ops/s
Max Throughput composite_terms-keyword 2.01 ops/s
50th percentile latency composite_terms-keyword 319.963 ms
90th percentile latency composite_terms-keyword 355.275 ms
99th percentile latency composite_terms-keyword 375.696 ms
100th percentile latency composite_terms-keyword 385.866 ms
50th percentile service time composite_terms-keyword 318.921 ms
90th percentile service time composite_terms-keyword 354.143 ms
99th percentile service time composite_terms-keyword 374.829 ms
100th percentile service time composite_terms-keyword 384.784 ms
error rate composite_terms-keyword 0 %
Min Throughput composite-date_histogram-daily 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput composite-date_histogram-daily 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput composite-date_histogram-daily 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput composite-date_histogram-daily 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency composite-date_histogram-daily 5.4496 ms
90th percentile latency composite-date_histogram-daily 5.92098 ms
99th percentile latency composite-date_histogram-daily 6.25984 ms
100th percentile latency composite-date_histogram-daily 6.43986 ms
50th percentile service time composite-date_histogram-daily 4.11034 ms
90th percentile service time composite-date_histogram-daily 4.29569 ms
99th percentile service time composite-date_histogram-daily 4.66008 ms
100th percentile service time composite-date_histogram-daily 4.66345 ms
error rate composite-date_histogram-daily 0 %
Min Throughput range 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range 6.80594 ms
90th percentile latency range 7.58287 ms
99th percentile latency range 8.25245 ms
100th percentile latency range 8.38628 ms
50th percentile service time range 5.41801 ms
90th percentile service time range 6.0465 ms
99th percentile service time range 6.93046 ms
100th percentile service time range 7.07078 ms
error rate range 0 %
Min Throughput range-numeric 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range-numeric 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range-numeric 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range-numeric 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range-numeric 3.88736 ms
90th percentile latency range-numeric 4.3036 ms
99th percentile latency range-numeric 4.72582 ms
100th percentile latency range-numeric 4.83127 ms
50th percentile service time range-numeric 2.54035 ms
90th percentile service time range-numeric 2.67847 ms
99th percentile service time range-numeric 3.0044 ms
100th percentile service time range-numeric 3.02256 ms
error rate range-numeric 0 %
Min Throughput keyword-in-range 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput keyword-in-range 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput keyword-in-range 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput keyword-in-range 2.03 ops/s
50th percentile latency keyword-in-range 15.407 ms
90th percentile latency keyword-in-range 17.512 ms
99th percentile latency keyword-in-range 28.0026 ms
100th percentile latency keyword-in-range 29.617 ms
50th percentile service time keyword-in-range 14.0037 ms
90th percentile service time keyword-in-range 15.3609 ms
99th percentile service time keyword-in-range 26.7149 ms
100th percentile service time keyword-in-range 28.3269 ms
error rate keyword-in-range 0 %
Min Throughput date_histogram_hourly_agg 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput date_histogram_hourly_agg 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput date_histogram_hourly_agg 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput date_histogram_hourly_agg 2.03 ops/s
50th percentile latency date_histogram_hourly_agg 7.84468 ms
90th percentile latency date_histogram_hourly_agg 8.86338 ms
99th percentile latency date_histogram_hourly_agg 9.42103 ms
100th percentile latency date_histogram_hourly_agg 9.57013 ms
50th percentile service time date_histogram_hourly_agg 6.32825 ms
90th percentile service time date_histogram_hourly_agg 7.40985 ms
99th percentile service time date_histogram_hourly_agg 8.35277 ms
100th percentile service time date_histogram_hourly_agg 8.37198 ms
error rate date_histogram_hourly_agg 0 %
Min Throughput date_histogram_minute_agg 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput date_histogram_minute_agg 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput date_histogram_minute_agg 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput date_histogram_minute_agg 2.03 ops/s
50th percentile latency date_histogram_minute_agg 42.0163 ms
90th percentile latency date_histogram_minute_agg 44.2293 ms
99th percentile latency date_histogram_minute_agg 59.4383 ms
100th percentile latency date_histogram_minute_agg 62.2743 ms
50th percentile service time date_histogram_minute_agg 40.6195 ms
90th percentile service time date_histogram_minute_agg 42.7067 ms
99th percentile service time date_histogram_minute_agg 58.0768 ms
100th percentile service time date_histogram_minute_agg 60.4925 ms
error rate date_histogram_minute_agg 0 %
Min Throughput scroll 47.44 pages/s
Mean Throughput scroll 48.44 pages/s
Median Throughput scroll 48.6 pages/s
Max Throughput scroll 48.93 pages/s
50th percentile latency scroll 1700.39 ms
90th percentile latency scroll 1833.45 ms
99th percentile latency scroll 1930.06 ms
100th percentile latency scroll 1945.1 ms
50th percentile service time scroll 490.369 ms
90th percentile service time scroll 521.752 ms
99th percentile service time scroll 530.31 ms
100th percentile service time scroll 530.859 ms
error rate scroll 0 %
Min Throughput query-string-on-message 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput query-string-on-message 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput query-string-on-message 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput query-string-on-message 2.03 ops/s
50th percentile latency query-string-on-message 7.29134 ms
90th percentile latency query-string-on-message 7.75765 ms
99th percentile latency query-string-on-message 8.55206 ms
100th percentile latency query-string-on-message 8.64383 ms
50th percentile service time query-string-on-message 5.77286 ms
90th percentile service time query-string-on-message 6.12662 ms
99th percentile service time query-string-on-message 7.2182 ms
100th percentile service time query-string-on-message 7.51858 ms
error rate query-string-on-message 0 %
Min Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered 15.2252 ms
90th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered 21.4941 ms
99th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered 53.6131 ms
100th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered 83.3242 ms
50th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered 13.8142 ms
90th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered 20.2088 ms
99th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered 52.1026 ms
100th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered 82.062 ms
error rate query-string-on-message-filtered 0 %
Min Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 2.03 ops/s
50th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 35.0369 ms
90th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 43.9013 ms
99th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 45.518 ms
100th percentile latency query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 46.0372 ms
50th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 33.6271 ms
90th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 42.8184 ms
99th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 44.2542 ms
100th percentile service time query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 44.9918 ms
error rate query-string-on-message-filtered-sorted-num 0 %
Min Throughput sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 6.33779 ms
90th percentile latency sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 6.81507 ms
99th percentile latency sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 7.49112 ms
100th percentile latency sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 7.54628 ms
50th percentile service time sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 4.96212 ms
90th percentile service time sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 5.15291 ms
99th percentile service time sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 6.02993 ms
100th percentile service time sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 6.18328 ms
error rate sort_keyword_can_match_shortcut 0 %
Min Throughput sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 6.40151 ms
90th percentile latency sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 6.86611 ms
99th percentile latency sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 7.53503 ms
100th percentile latency sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 7.54536 ms
50th percentile service time sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 5.03241 ms
90th percentile service time sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 5.16264 ms
99th percentile service time sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 6.1037 ms
100th percentile service time sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 6.39344 ms
error rate sort_keyword_no_can_match_shortcut 0 %
Min Throughput sort_numeric_desc 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput sort_numeric_desc 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput sort_numeric_desc 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput sort_numeric_desc 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc 5.80209 ms
90th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc 6.22795 ms
99th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc 6.84144 ms
100th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc 6.86394 ms
50th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc 4.45484 ms
90th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc 4.73539 ms
99th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc 5.38476 ms
100th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc 5.43875 ms
error rate sort_numeric_desc 0 %
Min Throughput sort_numeric_asc 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput sort_numeric_asc 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput sort_numeric_asc 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput sort_numeric_asc 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc 6.01563 ms
90th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc 6.39845 ms
99th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc 6.54318 ms
100th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc 6.56394 ms
50th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc 4.65865 ms
90th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc 4.78921 ms
99th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc 5.56105 ms
100th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc 5.60811 ms
error rate sort_numeric_asc 0 %
Min Throughput sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc_with_match 3.64482 ms
90th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc_with_match 4.08741 ms
99th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc_with_match 4.478 ms
100th percentile latency sort_numeric_desc_with_match 4.68509 ms
50th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.3219 ms
90th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.4052 ms
99th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.77831 ms
100th percentile service time sort_numeric_desc_with_match 2.99986 ms
error rate sort_numeric_desc_with_match 0 %
Min Throughput sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc_with_match 3.76097 ms
90th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc_with_match 4.18391 ms
99th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc_with_match 4.32846 ms
100th percentile latency sort_numeric_asc_with_match 4.34161 ms
50th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.41491 ms
90th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.49694 ms
99th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.68456 ms
100th percentile service time sort_numeric_asc_with_match 2.73599 ms
error rate sort_numeric_asc_with_match 0 %
Min Throughput range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 3.67214 ms
90th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 4.12715 ms
99th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 4.42078 ms
100th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 4.46352 ms
50th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.2886 ms
90th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.50388 ms
99th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.61742 ms
100th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 2.63018 ms
error rate range_field_conjunction_big_range_big_term_query 0 %
Min Throughput range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 4.04318 ms
90th percentile latency range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 4.44405 ms
99th percentile latency range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 4.68277 ms
100th percentile latency range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 4.82901 ms
50th percentile service time range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.66189 ms
90th percentile service time range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.76836 ms
99th percentile service time range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.8759 ms
100th percentile service time range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 2.88594 ms
error rate range_field_disjunction_big_range_small_term_query 0 %
Min Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 3.73088 ms
90th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 4.17203 ms
99th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 4.32107 ms
100th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 4.34358 ms
50th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.44586 ms
90th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.5403 ms
99th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.67096 ms
100th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 2.68441 ms
error rate range_field_conjunction_small_range_small_term_query 0 %
Min Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 3.72369 ms
90th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 4.13146 ms
99th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 4.30258 ms
100th percentile latency range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 4.35999 ms
50th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.41752 ms
90th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.48199 ms
99th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.56462 ms
100th percentile service time range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 2.57496 ms
error rate range_field_conjunction_small_range_big_term_query 0 %
Min Throughput range-auto-date-histo 1.95 ops/s
Mean Throughput range-auto-date-histo 1.97 ops/s
Median Throughput range-auto-date-histo 1.97 ops/s
Max Throughput range-auto-date-histo 1.98 ops/s
50th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo 447.365 ms
90th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo 507.276 ms
99th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo 528.195 ms
100th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo 528.589 ms
50th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo 444.168 ms
90th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo 504.536 ms
99th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo 523.013 ms
100th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo 527.2 ms
error rate range-auto-date-histo 0 %
Min Throughput range-with-metrics 0.11 ops/s
Mean Throughput range-with-metrics 0.11 ops/s
Median Throughput range-with-metrics 0.11 ops/s
Max Throughput range-with-metrics 0.11 ops/s
50th percentile latency range-with-metrics 860224 ms
90th percentile latency range-with-metrics 1.20678e+06 ms
99th percentile latency range-with-metrics 1.28517e+06 ms
100th percentile latency range-with-metrics 1.28967e+06 ms
50th percentile service time range-with-metrics 8975.29 ms
90th percentile service time range-with-metrics 9872.85 ms
99th percentile service time range-with-metrics 10414.7 ms
100th percentile service time range-with-metrics 10465.8 ms
error rate range-with-metrics 0 %
Min Throughput range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 0.12 ops/s
Mean Throughput range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 0.12 ops/s
Median Throughput range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 0.12 ops/s
Max Throughput range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 0.12 ops/s
50th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 773112 ms
90th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 1.0814e+06 ms
99th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 1.15226e+06 ms
100th percentile latency range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 1.15588e+06 ms
50th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 8063.56 ms
90th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 8983.44 ms
99th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 9623.43 ms
100th percentile service time range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 9642.99 ms
error rate range-auto-date-histo-with-metrics 0 %
Min Throughput range-agg-1 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range-agg-1 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range-agg-1 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range-agg-1 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range-agg-1 4.16129 ms
90th percentile latency range-agg-1 4.74931 ms
99th percentile latency range-agg-1 4.84434 ms
100th percentile latency range-agg-1 4.85385 ms
50th percentile service time range-agg-1 2.89441 ms
90th percentile service time range-agg-1 2.991 ms
99th percentile service time range-agg-1 3.57519 ms
100th percentile service time range-agg-1 3.85935 ms
error rate range-agg-1 0 %
Min Throughput range-agg-2 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range-agg-2 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range-agg-2 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range-agg-2 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range-agg-2 4.19794 ms
90th percentile latency range-agg-2 4.5885 ms
99th percentile latency range-agg-2 7.41988 ms
100th percentile latency range-agg-2 9.9892 ms
50th percentile service time range-agg-2 2.80223 ms
90th percentile service time range-agg-2 2.98902 ms
99th percentile service time range-agg-2 6.10002 ms
100th percentile service time range-agg-2 9.08158 ms
error rate range-agg-2 0 %
Min Throughput cardinality-agg-low 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput cardinality-agg-low 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput cardinality-agg-low 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput cardinality-agg-low 2.03 ops/s
50th percentile latency cardinality-agg-low 5.08377 ms
90th percentile latency cardinality-agg-low 5.76858 ms
99th percentile latency cardinality-agg-low 6.62151 ms
100th percentile latency cardinality-agg-low 6.68603 ms
50th percentile service time cardinality-agg-low 3.60627 ms
90th percentile service time cardinality-agg-low 4.20849 ms
99th percentile service time cardinality-agg-low 4.93942 ms
100th percentile service time cardinality-agg-low 4.99426 ms
error rate cardinality-agg-low 0 %
Min Throughput cardinality-agg-high 1.04 ops/s
Mean Throughput cardinality-agg-high 1.05 ops/s
Median Throughput cardinality-agg-high 1.05 ops/s
Max Throughput cardinality-agg-high 1.07 ops/s
50th percentile latency cardinality-agg-high 45134.1 ms
90th percentile latency cardinality-agg-high 63021.6 ms
99th percentile latency cardinality-agg-high 66978.7 ms
100th percentile latency cardinality-agg-high 67274.3 ms
50th percentile service time cardinality-agg-high 876.893 ms
90th percentile service time cardinality-agg-high 1192.39 ms
99th percentile service time cardinality-agg-high 1238.25 ms
100th percentile service time cardinality-agg-high 1244.47 ms
error rate cardinality-agg-high 0 %
Min Throughput cardinality-agg-very-high 0.83 ops/s
Mean Throughput cardinality-agg-very-high 0.84 ops/s
Median Throughput cardinality-agg-very-high 0.84 ops/s
Max Throughput cardinality-agg-very-high 0.85 ops/s
50th percentile latency cardinality-agg-very-high 70081.6 ms
90th percentile latency cardinality-agg-very-high 98027.6 ms
99th percentile latency cardinality-agg-very-high 103764 ms
100th percentile latency cardinality-agg-very-high 104177 ms
50th percentile service time cardinality-agg-very-high 1135.58 ms
90th percentile service time cardinality-agg-very-high 1436.49 ms
99th percentile service time cardinality-agg-very-high 1449.25 ms
100th percentile service time cardinality-agg-very-high 1451.89 ms
error rate cardinality-agg-very-high 0 %
Min Throughput range_with_asc_sort 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range_with_asc_sort 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range_with_asc_sort 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range_with_asc_sort 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range_with_asc_sort 7.15297 ms
90th percentile latency range_with_asc_sort 8.36489 ms
99th percentile latency range_with_asc_sort 8.9333 ms
100th percentile latency range_with_asc_sort 8.97882 ms
50th percentile service time range_with_asc_sort 5.6557 ms
90th percentile service time range_with_asc_sort 7.15001 ms
99th percentile service time range_with_asc_sort 7.28687 ms
100th percentile service time range_with_asc_sort 7.3195 ms
error rate range_with_asc_sort 0 %
Min Throughput range_with_desc_sort 2.01 ops/s
Mean Throughput range_with_desc_sort 2.02 ops/s
Median Throughput range_with_desc_sort 2.02 ops/s
Max Throughput range_with_desc_sort 2.04 ops/s
50th percentile latency range_with_desc_sort 7.3589 ms
90th percentile latency range_with_desc_sort 8.58677 ms
99th percentile latency range_with_desc_sort 9.53165 ms
100th percentile latency range_with_desc_sort 9.63424 ms
50th percentile service time range_with_desc_sort 6.00134 ms
90th percentile service time range_with_desc_sort 7.51576 ms
99th percentile service time range_with_desc_sort 7.72509 ms
100th percentile service time range_with_desc_sort 7.82089 ms
error rate range_with_desc_sort 0 %

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Persistent review updated to latest commit e709c4a

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✅ Gradle check result for e709c4a: SUCCESS

@harshavamsi
improve coverage
4c7121f 
Signed-off-by: Harsha Vamsi Kalluri <harshavamsi096@gmail.com>
@harshavamsi
Merge branch 'main' into upgrade-lucene-10.5.0
3ae5014
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Persistent review updated to latest commit 3ae5014

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✅ Gradle check result for 3ae5014: SUCCESS

@opensearch-ci-bot

opensearch-ci-bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The benchmark job https://build.ci.opensearch.org/job/benchmark-pull-request/7959/ failed.
Please see logs to debug.

jainankitk
jainankitk approved these changes Jun 29, 2026
View reviewed changes

@jainankitk jainankitk left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@jainankitk jainankitk merged commit 4a36eed into opensearch-project:main Jun 29, 2026
23 checks passed
@harshavamsi harshavamsi deleted the upgrade-lucene-10.5.0 branch June 29, 2026 19:43
@opensearch-ci-bot

opensearch-ci-bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The benchmark job https://build.ci.opensearch.org/job/benchmark-pull-request/7960/ failed.
Please see logs to debug.

@opensearch-ci-bot

opensearch-ci-bot commented Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Benchmark Results

Benchmark Results for Job: https://build.ci.opensearch.org/job/benchmark-pull-request/7956/

Metric Task Value Unit
Cumulative indexing time of primary shards 105.024 min
Min cumulative indexing time across primary shards 34.8224 min
Median cumulative indexing time across primary shards 34.9204 min
Max cumulative indexing time across primary shards 35.2807 min
Cumulative indexing throttle time of primary shards 0 min
Min cumulative indexing throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Median cumulative indexing throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Max cumulative indexing throttle time across primary shards 0 min
Cumulative merge time of primary shards 101.248 min
Cumulative merge count of primary shards 51
Min cumulative merge time across primary shards 33.6788 min
Median cumulative merge time across primary shards 33.7492 min
Max cumulative merge time across primary shards 33.82 min
Cumulative merge throttle time of primary shards 81.7503 min
Min cumulative merge throttle time across primary shards 27.1947 min
Median cumulative merge throttle time across primary shards 27.259 min
Max cumulative merge throttle time across primary shards 27.2966 min
Cumulative refresh time of primary shards 0.800967 min
Cumulative refresh count of primary shards 288
Min cumulative refresh time across primary shards 0.246783 min
Median cumulative refresh time across primary shards 0.272867 min
Max cumulative refresh time across primary shards 0.281317 min
Cumulative flush time of primary shards 10.223 min
Cumulative flush count of primary shards 231
Min cumulative flush time across primary shards 3.34173 min
Median cumulative flush time across primary shards 3.4368 min
Max cumulative flush time across primary shards 3.44445 min
Total Young Gen GC time 5.494 s
Total Young Gen GC count 619
Total Old Gen GC time 0 s
Total Old Gen GC count 0
Doc count 1.16e+08
Store size 25.5469 GB
Translog size 1.53668e-07 GB
Heap used for segments 0 MB
Heap used for doc values 0 MB
Heap used for terms 0 MB
Heap used for norms 0 MB
Heap used for points 0 MB
Heap used for stored fields 0 MB
Segment count 51
Min Throughput index-append 31297.7 docs/s
Mean Throughput index-append 31951.9 docs/s
Median Throughput index-append 32032.8 docs/s
Max Throughput index-append 32100.9 docs/s
50th percentile latency index-append 262.127 ms
90th percentile latency index-append 276.846 ms
99th percentile latency index-append 300.498 ms
99.9th percentile latency index-append 331.589 ms
99.99th percentile latency index-append 531.502 ms
100th percentile latency index-append 545.257 ms
50th percentile service time index-append 262.124 ms
90th percentile service time index-append 276.84 ms
99th percentile service time index-append 300.552 ms
99.9th percentile service time index-append 331.589 ms
99.99th percentile service time index-append 531.502 ms
100th percentile service time index-append 545.257 ms
error rate index-append 0 %
100th percentile latency wait-until-merges-finish 120001 ms
100th percentile service time wait-until-merges-finish 120001 ms
error rate wait-until-merges-finish 100 %

@reta reta mentioned this pull request Jun 29, 2026
Closed
KhishorekumarBS pushed a commit to KhishorekumarBS/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Jul 3, 2026
@harshavamsi
Upgrading lucene version to 10.5.0 (opensearch-project#22322)
0b9e784 
Signed-off-by: Harsha Vamsi Kalluri <harshavamsi096@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@prudhvigodithi prudhvigodithi prudhvigodithi approved these changes
@jainankitk jainankitk jainankitk approved these changes
@andrross andrross Awaiting requested review from andrross andrross is a code owner
@ashking94 ashking94 Awaiting requested review from ashking94 ashking94 is a code owner
@Bukhtawar Bukhtawar Awaiting requested review from Bukhtawar Bukhtawar is a code owner
@cwperks cwperks Awaiting requested review from cwperks cwperks is a code owner
@dbwiddis dbwiddis Awaiting requested review from dbwiddis dbwiddis is a code owner
@gbbafna gbbafna Awaiting requested review from gbbafna gbbafna is a code owner
@jed326 jed326 Awaiting requested review from jed326 jed326 is a code owner
@kotwanikunal kotwanikunal Awaiting requested review from kotwanikunal kotwanikunal is a code owner
@mch2 mch2 Awaiting requested review from mch2 mch2 is a code owner
@msfroh msfroh Awaiting requested review from msfroh msfroh is a code owner
@owaiskazi19 owaiskazi19 Awaiting requested review from owaiskazi19 owaiskazi19 is a code owner
@reta reta Awaiting requested review from reta reta is a code owner
@sachinpkale sachinpkale Awaiting requested review from sachinpkale sachinpkale is a code owner
@saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli Awaiting requested review from saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli is a code owner
@shwetathareja shwetathareja Awaiting requested review from shwetathareja shwetathareja is a code owner
@sohami sohami Awaiting requested review from sohami sohami is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

skip-diff-analyzer Maintainer to skip code-diff-analyzer check, after reviewing issues in AI analysis.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@harshavamsi @prudhvigodithi @opensearch-ci-bot @jainankitk