Comment 16 for bug 1698206

Unfortunately, I had technical difficulties with my test environment for most of this week, and I am going to be unavailable to test this again until August 23. If somebody else has the tuits to look at this branch in the meantime, please do. Otherwise, it's on the top of my list for testing (along with bug 1706107) when I get back.

I also wanted to add a note that when I previously tested this branch on an upgraded system about a month ago, it worked very well. We performed our testing on two systems with identical datasets with the only difference being that one had the new code and the other was vanilla master.

The speed of retrieving search results were mostly improved with this branch. We noticed the biggest performance gains in copy location group searches and searches that were limited by availability. We didn't see any unexpected changes in the records that were retrieved or the sort order. However, we were able to retrieve large results sets (up to the 100,000 maximum we had configured) without any hits on performance when compared to the control test server. We also verified that search result counts on the search results page were always accurate. Once we hit the 100,000 maximum, the search results page displayed a count of 100,000+.