[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5022?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15621644#comment-15621644
]
Stefan Egli commented on OAK-5022:
----------------------------------
[~mmarth], re
bq. Re "includeSubtreeOnRemove": need to careful to not make this a very
expensive operation for large subtrees.
Agreed. Removal of a large subtree will probably be at the same cost as
removing a large subtree. As either way the subtree needs to be traversed
(either in prefiltering or if prefiltering doesn't result in an exclude with
the actual finer-grade filter).
bq. Could this be handled lazily?
Not sure what exactly you're referring to, not handling this in prefiltering
but only in the affected filter (which is by definition async)?
> add includeSubtreeOnDelete flag to OakEventFilter
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-5022
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5022
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: jcr
> Affects Versions: 1.5.12
> Reporter: Stefan Egli
> Assignee: Stefan Egli
>
> (Originally reported as JCR-4037, but moved to Oak as a result of introducing
> the OakEventFilter in OAK-5013. From the original description: )
> In some cases of observation it would be useful to receive events of child
> node or properties of a parent/grandparent that was deleted. Currently (in
> Oak at least) one only receives a deleted event for the node that was deleted
> and none of the children.
> Suggesting to (re)introduce a flag, eg as follows to the
> JackrabbitEventFilter:
> {code}
> boolean includeSubtreeOnRemove;
> {code}
> (Open for any better name of course)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
