Jeremy Taylor

@jacobobryant does this print out anything successfully? ```clojure (def c (atom 0)) (with-open [l (xt/open-tx-log (xtdb-node) nil true)] (prn :next 0) (while (.hasNext l) (when (zero? (mod (swap! c inc)...

Thanks for this report @caleb! That definitely seems awkward, and I don't see an obvious solution either right now. We will bear the requirement in mind when planning future work...

Thanks for raising this. Noting that another non-Clojure workaround would be to use a JSON config, but that may not currently work either if the JDBC module is involved, as...

See also https://github.com/xtdb/xtdb/issues/676 - "Users can query XT to discover data that became valid in a given time range" and https://github.com/xtdb/xtdb/issues/463

@tkovis Just to confirm, was this using `1.18.0`?

@theronic `sync` should be doing the same job as `await-tx` here, by blocking until all ongoing ingestion is finished. I would also expect the Lucene module to have no impact...

Briefly noting that if a failed `match` was used prior to the initial submit here, then this other recently solved issue could explain what happened in this case also: https://github.com/xtdb/xtdb/issues/1683

I just confirmed that the HLL changes did indeed do the job - good shout! Also, I realise now that _of course_ query compilation can't take the cardinality of the...

Whilst the original test case is solved, I'm re-opening for reassement (internal Slack thread https://juxt.slack.com/archives/C018YJ4LVCJ/p1636731280161100). A repro is required though.

I spent time looking at this again today, which included eyeing over the relevant `site` commit for the example mentioned above (https://github.com/juxt/site/commit/01bc3bdb3c099e2f7bf0bbecbe553773dd2b44a8) ...but I certainly haven't been able to reproduce...