From solr-user-return-76673-apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Wed Dec 26 02:21:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 15D7BEE3C for ; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:21:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 77127 invoked by uid 500); 26 Dec 2012 02:21:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 77073 invoked by uid 500); 26 Dec 2012 02:21:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact solr-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list solr-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 77046 invoked by uid 99); 26 Dec 2012 02:21:07 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:21:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of markrmiller@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.177 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.177] (HELO mail-vc0-f177.google.com) (209.85.220.177) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:21:00 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m8so8348265vcd.8 for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:20:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=uYPKvRiMCY4gajMlE0k4IlEkEINLsGprnfeL7OBfAQw=; b=bSTQrn9fO5bV4Z5o0wcZz2fUTaWiKxkrfEImk0MXcB9whX4HWnmRXey2vZ0HtbWr2Z yi4EiRiYLJDvr0x7nqw/5LXY/lJ5s5o0JrOrYMdmyCplrs3i6cRNM+GzYgBRVl1O9Q5h oKA9oLUv2RlOYnSsnPl8Wszab8GVuzgQlBZ0zFmwgc4Ri/LBU4aSWHQ5Tql4u0jNqtmF e7yQ839Pkqv9C1HnyItzoSNbSzBCFOHsQU6BnZ4UHg51NP/Pie888CLsxeaqfM2jXvRm /5SYgArDgZvlgZhxxjcvh9mb4XEMk9GLAo1Gf8xwPRvVl4sPjnNnnV9mv3EGgwIE41TQ wfdw== X-Received: by 10.52.174.71 with SMTP id bq7mr34699606vdc.49.1356488439742; Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:20:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (ool-18bf2b7d.dyn.optonline.net. [24.191.43.125]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l8sm22522187vdh.8.2012.12.25.18.20.35 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:20:37 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: Invalid version (expected 2, but 60) or the data in not in 'javabin' From: Mark Miller In-Reply-To: <7E2AC591E7B3B146BB21F295279AC26C070DABA7@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com> Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 21:20:33 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <7E2AC591E7B3B146BB21F295279AC26C070DA0B4@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com> <7E2AC591E7B3B146BB21F295279AC26C070DABA7@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org The problem is not necessary xml - it seems to be anything that is not = valid javabin - I've just most often seen it with 404s that return an = html error. I'm not sure if there is a jira issue or not, but this type of thing = should be failing in a more user friendly way. As to why your response is corrupt, I have no guesses. This is easily repeatable? It's happening every time, or randomly? - Mark On Dec 25, 2012, at 4:23 AM, Shahar Davidson = wrote: > Thanks Otis. >=20 > I went through every piece of info that I could lay may hands on. > Most of them are about incompatible SolrJ versions (that's not my = case) and there was one message from Mark Miller that Solr may respond = with an XML instead of javabin in case there was some kind of http = error being returned (that's not my case either). >=20 > I'm using distributed search. > I added some debug output to print out the response once the "Invalid = version" exception is caught (in JavaBinCode.unmarshal() ). > What I saw is that the response actually contains the facet response = in XML format, yet I also noticed that the response is corrupt (i.e. as = if a chunk of text has been taken out of the middle of the reply - some = kind of overrun perhaps?). >=20 > Any help would be appreciated. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Shahar. >=20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:otis.gospodnetic@gmail.com]=20 > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 6:23 AM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Invalid version (expected 2, but 60) or the data in not = in 'javabin' >=20 > Hi, >=20 > Have a look at http://search-lucene.com/?q=3Dinvalid+version+javabin >=20 > Otis > -- > Solr Monitoring - http://sematext.com/spm/index.html > Search Analytics - http://sematext.com/search-analytics/index.html >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Shahar Davidson = wrote: >=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >> I'm encountering this error randomly when running a distributed = facet. >> (i.e. I'm sending the exact same request, yet this does not reproduce >> consistently) >> I have about 180 shards that are being queried. >> It seems that when Solr distributes the request to the shards one , = or=20 >> perhaps more, shards return an XML reply instead of Javabin. >>=20 >> I added some debug output to JavaBinCode.unmarshal (as done in the=20= >> debugging.patch of SOLR-3258) to check whether the XML reply holds an=20= >> error or not, and I noticed that the XML actually holds the response=20= >> from one of the shards. >>=20 >> I'm using the patch provided in SOLR-2894 on top of trunk 1404975. >>=20 >> Has anyone encountered such an issue? Any ideas? >>=20 >> Thanks, >>=20 >> Shahar. >>=20 >=20 >=20 > Email secured by Check Point