[
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)
