> > > On 21.9.16 8:50 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 21.9.16 8:33 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >>>>> Pushing filters as much into Oak has many performance advantages >>>>> though >>>>>> compared to filter messages after delivery. Also Oak would easily >>>>>> able >>>>>> to support the delete use case described above. >>>>>> >>>> In all cases, always, guaranteed? >>> >>> For some definition of "all cases, always, guaranteed": yes ;-) >> >> :) So there is no compaction, never? > > There isn't if you configure it that way. It's up to you. > > But this is completely irrelevant here. If compaction would cause events > to get lost, there is nothing you could do about it in Sling. Regardless > whether you implement an ad-hoc DYI filter in Sling or use Oak filters. > I agree.
Just to clarify, if I delete "/libs/foo" I get oak observation events for all nodes that where under /foo with the removed properties of each node, right? Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland cziege...@apache.org
