[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-9341?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17274452#comment-17274452 ]
Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-9341: ------------------------------------- Yes, I could confirm this using the query: {noformat} /jcr:root/oak:index//element(*, oak:QueryIndexDefinition)[@type='lucene'] option(index name test) {noformat} and the index {noformat} "/oak:index/test": { "compatVersion": 2, "type": "lucene", "async": "async", "includedPaths": ["/oak:index"], "jcr:primaryType": "oak:QueryIndexDefinition", "indexRules": { "oak:QueryIndexDefinition": { "properties": { "type": { "name": "type", "propertyIndex": true, } } } } } {noformat} > Unversioned index is getting used even if it doesn't have mutable content > index data > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: OAK-9341 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-9341 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: indexing > Reporter: Amrit Verma > Priority: Major > > While using a composite node store, if an index doesn't specify a version in > its name e.g. {{/oak:index/lucene}} it gets considered for use in a query > even if it doesn't have the oak mount index data. > This the probably due to the reason that `isIndexActive` check is only > performed for the versioned indices here - > https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/08c7b20e0676739d9c445b5249c3f71004b6b894/oak-search/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/search/spi/query/IndexName.java#L208-L215 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)