On 21.9.16 9:14 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
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?
No, just for the root of the removed tree.
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1459?focusedCommentId=13911484&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13911484
;-)
Michael
Carsten
