Skip to content

MBS-12729: Drop support for search.musicbrainz.org #3590

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

reosarevok
Copy link
Member

@reosarevok reosarevok commented Jul 4, 2025

Implement MBS-12729

Descriptions

This removes all references to SEARCH_ENGINE (since there's just the one, SOLR, nowadays, so we should assume it). It also drops references to search.musicbrainz.org which is now gone.

The INSTALL.md section about rate limiting seems fairly useless now, so I turned it into basic info about search servers.

Questions

Should we have any default/placeholder SEARCH_SERVER value?

Testing

None.

This removes all references to  SEARCH_ENGINE (since there's
just the one, SOLR, nowadays, so we should assume it).
It also drops references to search.musicbrainz.org which is now gone.

The INSTALL.md section about rate limiting seems fairly
useless now, so I turned it into basic info about search servers.
@reosarevok reosarevok added Refactoring Refactoring-only PRs (eslint fixes etc) Documentation PRs that mostly create or update documentation labels Jul 4, 2025
Comment on lines +839 to +841
# Solr has a bug where the dismax end point behaves differently
# from edismax (advanced) when the query size is 1. This is a fix
# for that. See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12409
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems to have been resolved in 2019: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12409

We should probably just use select always now? But I'm not familiar enough with this and haven't tested it yet, so I thought I'd ask first :)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That ticket was only resolved as "Information Provided" (see the comments). In fact it appears that it's not actually a bug. The code linked in the first comment (if that is indeed the source of this behavior) is still present to this day with the same comment indicating that it's intentional:

we need at least two or there shouldn't be a boost

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Documentation PRs that mostly create or update documentation Refactoring Refactoring-only PRs (eslint fixes etc)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants