[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5841) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5841?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884135#comment-15884135 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5841: - Build is still failing. Failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1459|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1459/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1459/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 failed > --- > > Key: OAK-5841 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5841 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting > #1456|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1456/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1456/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5839) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884100#comment-15884100 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5839: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1458|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1458/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1458/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed > - > > Key: OAK-5839 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting > #1455|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5842) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1457 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5842?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884099#comment-15884099 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5842: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1458|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1458/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1458/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1457 failed > - > > Key: OAK-5842 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5842 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1457 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting > #1457|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1457/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1457/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5844) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1458 failed
Hudson created OAK-5844: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1458 failed Key: OAK-5844 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5844 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1458 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1458|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1458/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1458/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5841) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5841?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884096#comment-15884096 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5841: - Build is still failing. Failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1458|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1458/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1458/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 failed > --- > > Key: OAK-5841 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5841 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting > #1456|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1456/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1456/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5840) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5840?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884080#comment-15884080 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5840: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1457|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1457/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1457/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456 failed > --- > > Key: OAK-5840 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5840 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1456|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1456/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1456/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5839) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884039#comment-15884039 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5839: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1457|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1457/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1457/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed > - > > Key: OAK-5839 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting > #1455|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5843) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1457 failed
Hudson created OAK-5843: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1457 failed Key: OAK-5843 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5843 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1457 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1457|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1457/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1457/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5841) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 failed
Hudson created OAK-5841: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 failed Key: OAK-5841 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5841 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1456|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1456/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1456/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5839) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15884024#comment-15884024 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5839: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1456|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1456/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1456/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed > - > > Key: OAK-5839 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting > #1455|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5840) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456 failed
Hudson created OAK-5840: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456 failed Key: OAK-5840 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5840 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1456|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1456/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1456/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5839) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed
Hudson created OAK-5839: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 failed Key: OAK-5839 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5839 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting #1455|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_RDB,profile=unittesting/1455/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5784) hashCode of RestrictionImpl doesn't include value
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
angela updated OAK-5784:
Fix Version/s: 1.6.1
> hashCode of RestrictionImpl doesn't include value
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5784
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5784
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
>Reporter: angela
>Assignee: angela
> Labels: performance
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1
>
> Attachments: ace_creation_noRestrictionFix_withSave.txt,
> ace_creation_restrictionHashFix_withSave.txt, OAK-5784.patch
>
>
> The hashCode generation of {{RestrictionImpl}} currently looks as follows:
> {code}
> public int hashCode() {
> return Objects.hashCode(definition, property);
> }
> {code}
> However, the hashCode of our {{PropertyState}} implementation doesn't include
> the value. See {{AbstractPropertyState}}:
> {code}
> public static int hashCode(PropertyState property) {
> return property.getName().hashCode();
> }
> {code}
> Consequently the hashCode of the {{AccessControlEntry}} implementation, the
> validation of ACEs in {{AccessControlValidator}} and the {{AcEntry}} created
> in the {{PermissionHook}} generates the same hashCode for entries that only
> differ by the value of a restriction.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-5784) hashCode of RestrictionImpl doesn't include value
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15880695#comment-15880695
]
angela edited comment on OAK-5784 at 2/24/17 5:15 PM:
--
trunk: Committed revision 1784162.
1.6.1: Committed revision 1784304.
was (Author: anchela):
Committed revision 1784162.
> hashCode of RestrictionImpl doesn't include value
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5784
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5784
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
>Reporter: angela
>Assignee: angela
> Labels: performance
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: ace_creation_noRestrictionFix_withSave.txt,
> ace_creation_restrictionHashFix_withSave.txt, OAK-5784.patch
>
>
> The hashCode generation of {{RestrictionImpl}} currently looks as follows:
> {code}
> public int hashCode() {
> return Objects.hashCode(definition, property);
> }
> {code}
> However, the hashCode of our {{PropertyState}} implementation doesn't include
> the value. See {{AbstractPropertyState}}:
> {code}
> public static int hashCode(PropertyState property) {
> return property.getName().hashCode();
> }
> {code}
> Consequently the hashCode of the {{AccessControlEntry}} implementation, the
> validation of ACEs in {{AccessControlValidator}} and the {{AcEntry}} created
> in the {{PermissionHook}} generates the same hashCode for entries that only
> differ by the value of a restriction.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5302) Remove legacy upgrade code from AbstractFileStore.collectFiles
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5302?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig updated OAK-5302:
---
Attachment: OAK_5302.patch
Proposed patch [^OAK_5302.patch]
[~alex.parvulescu], [~dulceanu], [~frm] could someone have a good look at this?
> Remove legacy upgrade code from AbstractFileStore.collectFiles
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5302
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5302
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: technical_debt
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK_5302.patch
>
>
> {{AbstractFileStore.collectFiles()}} contains legacy upgrade code dating back
> to special handling of binaries in older version of {{oak-segment}}
> (bulkFiles). We should remove this code.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5834) Remove the deprecated oak-segment module
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15883022#comment-15883022
]
angela commented on OAK-5834:
-
[~frm], may i suggest to move it to the archive instead of removing? that's
what we did with the mk-stuff.
> Remove the deprecated oak-segment module
>
>
> Key: OAK-5834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5834
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: segmentmk
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: deprecation, technical_debt
> Fix For: 1.7.0
>
>
> The {{oak-segment}} module has been deprecated for 1.6 with OAK-4247. We
> should remove it entirely now:
> * Remove the module
> * Remove fixtures and ITs pertaining to it
> * Remove references from documentation where not needed any more
> An open question is how we should deal with the tooling for {{oak-segment}}.
> Should we still maintain this in trunk and keep the required classes (which
> very much might be all) or should we maintain the tooling on the branches?
> What about new features in tooling?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5837) Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrei Dulceanu resolved OAK-5837.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed at r1784293
> Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
>
>
> Key: OAK-5837
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5837.patch
>
>
> {{CheckRepositoryTestBase#corruptRecord}} corrupts a {{NODE}} record by
> writing random bytes inside. Currently when a corrupt node {{/z}} is
> traversed by the consistency check the traversal will fail with the following
> message {{Error while traversing /z: null}}. Most likely the corruption stems
> from an attempt to read an out of bounds segment reference [1]. The log
> message in {{ConsistencyChecker}} should be changed to include the root cause
> and the reason of the traversal failure.
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/Segment.java#L266
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5837) Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882999#comment-15882999
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5837:
+1
> Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
>
>
> Key: OAK-5837
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5837.patch
>
>
> {{CheckRepositoryTestBase#corruptRecord}} corrupts a {{NODE}} record by
> writing random bytes inside. Currently when a corrupt node {{/z}} is
> traversed by the consistency check the traversal will fail with the following
> message {{Error while traversing /z: null}}. Most likely the corruption stems
> from an attempt to read an out of bounds segment reference [1]. The log
> message in {{ConsistencyChecker}} should be changed to include the root cause
> and the reason of the traversal failure.
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/Segment.java#L266
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-4893) Document conflict handling
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4893?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig resolved OAK-4893.
Resolution: Done
Fix Version/s: (was: 1.6.1)
1.7.0
Done at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784290=rev
> Document conflict handling
> --
>
> Key: OAK-4893
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4893
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: doc
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
> Labels: documentation
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
>
> We should add documentation how Oak deals with conflicts. This was once
> documented in the Javadocs of {{MicroKernel.rebase()}} but got lost along
> with that class. Note that OAK-1553 refines conflict handling but this
> refinement has not been implemented in all backends yet.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5838) Review PropertyStateValue implementation and PropertyValues utility
angela created OAK-5838:
---
Summary: Review PropertyStateValue implementation and
PropertyValues utility
Key: OAK-5838
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5838
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: core
Reporter: angela
see http://markmail.org/message/zgkn2ithituznq43 for the initial discussion.
topics to look at:
- implementation of oak-api + utility in {{spi.query}} instead of
{{plugins.memory}}
- implementation of PropertyStateValue.hashCode for binary values
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5838) Review PropertyStateValue implementation and PropertyValues utility
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5838?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
angela updated OAK-5838:
Fix Version/s: 1.8
> Review PropertyStateValue implementation and PropertyValues utility
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-5838
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5838
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
>Reporter: angela
> Labels: modularization, tech-debt
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> see http://markmail.org/message/zgkn2ithituznq43 for the initial discussion.
> topics to look at:
> - implementation of oak-api + utility in {{spi.query}} instead of
> {{plugins.memory}}
> - implementation of PropertyStateValue.hashCode for binary values
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5838) Review PropertyStateValue implementation and PropertyValues utility
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5838?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
angela updated OAK-5838:
Component/s: query
api
> Review PropertyStateValue implementation and PropertyValues utility
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-5838
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5838
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: api, core, query
>Reporter: angela
> Labels: modularization, tech-debt
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> see http://markmail.org/message/zgkn2ithituznq43 for the initial discussion.
> topics to look at:
> - implementation of oak-api + utility in {{spi.query}} instead of
> {{plugins.memory}}
> - implementation of PropertyStateValue.hashCode for binary values
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5837) Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
Andrei Dulceanu created OAK-5837:
Summary: Consistency check should log more details when traversing
a corrupt node
Key: OAK-5837
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
Priority: Minor
Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
{{CheckRepositoryTestBase#corruptRecord}} corrupts a {{NODE}} record by writing
random bytes inside. Currently when a corrupt node {{/z}} is traversed by the
consistency check the traversal will fail with the following message {{Error
while traversing /z: null}}. Most likely the corruption stems from an attempt
to read an out of bounds segment reference [1]. The log message in
{{ConsistencyChecker}} should be changed to include the root cause and the
reason of the traversal failure.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/Segment.java#L266
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5837) Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrei Dulceanu updated OAK-5837:
-
Component/s: segment-tar
> Consistency check should log more details when traversing a corrupt node
>
>
> Key: OAK-5837
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5837
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
>
> {{CheckRepositoryTestBase#corruptRecord}} corrupts a {{NODE}} record by
> writing random bytes inside. Currently when a corrupt node {{/z}} is
> traversed by the consistency check the traversal will fail with the following
> message {{Error while traversing /z: null}}. Most likely the corruption stems
> from an attempt to read an out of bounds segment reference [1]. The log
> message in {{ConsistencyChecker}} should be changed to include the root cause
> and the reason of the traversal failure.
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/Segment.java#L266
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5600) Test coverage for CheckCommand
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrei Dulceanu resolved OAK-5600.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed at rr1784281.
> Test coverage for CheckCommand
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5600
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5600-02.patch, OAK-5600-03.patch, OAK-5600-04.patch,
> OAK-5600.patch
>
>
> We should add tests for {{o.a.j.o.r.CheckCommand}} in order to validate
> recent changes introduced by adding/removing options and their arguments (see
> OAK-5275, OAK-5276, OAK-5277, OAK-5595). There is also a new feature
> introduced by OAK-5556 (filter paths) and a refactoring in OAK-5620 which
> must be thoroughly tested in order to avoid regressions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-5600) Test coverage for CheckCommand
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882815#comment-15882815
]
Andrei Dulceanu edited comment on OAK-5600 at 2/24/17 2:49 PM:
---
Fixed at r1784281.
was (Author: dulceanu):
Fixed at rr1784281.
> Test coverage for CheckCommand
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5600
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5600-02.patch, OAK-5600-03.patch, OAK-5600-04.patch,
> OAK-5600.patch
>
>
> We should add tests for {{o.a.j.o.r.CheckCommand}} in order to validate
> recent changes introduced by adding/removing options and their arguments (see
> OAK-5275, OAK-5276, OAK-5277, OAK-5595). There is also a new feature
> introduced by OAK-5556 (filter paths) and a refactoring in OAK-5620 which
> must be thoroughly tested in order to avoid regressions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5834) Remove the deprecated oak-segment module
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882797#comment-15882797
]
Francesco Mari commented on OAK-5834:
-
I think we should remove the code from trunk, including tooling. We can
maintain oak-segment on the latest possible branch (1.6), porting fixes back to
older branches when necessary.
> Remove the deprecated oak-segment module
>
>
> Key: OAK-5834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5834
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: segmentmk
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: deprecation, technical_debt
> Fix For: 1.7.0
>
>
> The {{oak-segment}} module has been deprecated for 1.6 with OAK-4247. We
> should remove it entirely now:
> * Remove the module
> * Remove fixtures and ITs pertaining to it
> * Remove references from documentation where not needed any more
> An open question is how we should deal with the tooling for {{oak-segment}}.
> Should we still maintain this in trunk and keep the required classes (which
> very much might be all) or should we maintain the tooling on the branches?
> What about new features in tooling?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5600) Test coverage for CheckCommand
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882783#comment-15882783
]
Andrei Dulceanu commented on OAK-5600:
--
bq. how does the consistency checker behave if no filter paths is given?
By default the filter path is set to {{/}}, if the {{--filter}} option wasn't
specified for {{check}}. Having {{--filter}} followed by nothing is not allowed
in {{CheckCommand}}.
> Test coverage for CheckCommand
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5600
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5600-02.patch, OAK-5600-03.patch, OAK-5600-04.patch,
> OAK-5600.patch
>
>
> We should add tests for {{o.a.j.o.r.CheckCommand}} in order to validate
> recent changes introduced by adding/removing options and their arguments (see
> OAK-5275, OAK-5276, OAK-5277, OAK-5595). There is also a new feature
> introduced by OAK-5556 (filter paths) and a refactoring in OAK-5620 which
> must be thoroughly tested in order to avoid regressions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5600) Test coverage for CheckCommand
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882769#comment-15882769
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5600:
Test case looks good.
Thinking about edge cases: how does the consistency checker behave if no filter
paths is given? Is this reasonable or should we prevent it at all?
> Test coverage for CheckCommand
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5600
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5600-02.patch, OAK-5600-03.patch, OAK-5600-04.patch,
> OAK-5600.patch
>
>
> We should add tests for {{o.a.j.o.r.CheckCommand}} in order to validate
> recent changes introduced by adding/removing options and their arguments (see
> OAK-5275, OAK-5276, OAK-5277, OAK-5595). There is also a new feature
> introduced by OAK-5556 (filter paths) and a refactoring in OAK-5620 which
> must be thoroughly tested in order to avoid regressions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5836) Permissions.isAggregate returns true for NO_PERMISSION placeholder
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5836?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] angela resolved OAK-5836. - Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.8 1.7.0 Committed revision 1784278. > Permissions.isAggregate returns true for NO_PERMISSION placeholder > -- > > Key: OAK-5836 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5836 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: core >Reporter: angela >Assignee: angela >Priority: Trivial > Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8 > > > spotted while writing test cases (see OAK-5793) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5600) Test coverage for CheckCommand
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrei Dulceanu updated OAK-5600:
-
Attachment: OAK-5600-04.patch
I added a new test for validating that checking {{/a}} in a repository with 2
revisions, the first one having a consistent {{/a}} and the second one having a
corrupt {{/a}} behaves correctly. With this, IMO this issue can be closed as we
cover a few cases on both a valid and an invalid repository.
[~mduerig], could you take a look at the patch?
> Test coverage for CheckCommand
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5600
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5600
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5600-02.patch, OAK-5600-03.patch, OAK-5600-04.patch,
> OAK-5600.patch
>
>
> We should add tests for {{o.a.j.o.r.CheckCommand}} in order to validate
> recent changes introduced by adding/removing options and their arguments (see
> OAK-5275, OAK-5276, OAK-5277, OAK-5595). There is also a new feature
> introduced by OAK-5556 (filter paths) and a refactoring in OAK-5620 which
> must be thoroughly tested in order to avoid regressions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-5753) Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882645#comment-15882645
]
Andrei Dulceanu edited comment on OAK-5753 at 2/24/17 1:47 PM:
---
Committed the current patch at r1784277.
Created OAK-5835 to track improvement in {{JournalReader}}.
was (Author: dulceanu):
Created OAK-5835 to track improvement in {{JournalReader}}. I will re-work the
patch after solving that one first.
> Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.8
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5753.patch
>
>
> To better explain the bug I'll describe the content of the revisions:
> # Valid Revision
> Adds child nodes {{a}}, {{b}}, {{c}}, {{d}}, {{e}}, {{f}} with various
> properties (blobs included)
> # Invalid Revision
> Adds child node {{z}} with some blob properties and then corrupts the
> {{NODE}} record holding {{z}}.
> Now when the consistency check is run, it correctly detects that the second
> revision is broken, *marks the path {{/z}} as corrupt* and then continues
> checking the first valid revision. Because of a check introduced for OAK-5556
> [1], which tries to validate the user provided absolute paths before checking
> them, the checker tries to check {{/z}} in the first revision, where of
> course it can't find it. Therefore the check incorrectly fails for this
> revision, although it shouldn't have to.
> /cc [~mduerig], [~frm]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5542) Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already in use)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882659#comment-15882659 ] angela commented on OAK-5542: - [~mduerig], as discussed before: yes backport makes sense. > Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already > in use) > > > Key: OAK-5542 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: auth-ldap, continuous integration >Affects Versions: 1.0.37, 1.2.23, 1.4.13, 1.7.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu, windows > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.8, 1.6.1, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK_5542.patch > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1390 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1390|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882647#comment-15882647
]
Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-3070:
bq. Apart from OAK-3070, resetting _deletedOnce keeps indices small.
Well!, That was another thing that I was wondering - why is there so many false
positives for _deletedOnce. The only reasonable place where resurrection is
common-place is under property index structure. May be, that's also something
worth investigating.
Anyway, coming back to this, I think this issue is far simpler in approach and
seems less risky to be backported. Since _deletedOnce was always immutable, I
wonder if we have some hidden dragons - I'm not saying that logically it's
incorrect to reset. I'm just not too comfortable with the potential risk. Iow,
I'd rather see this issue getting backported earlier - I feel OAK-5704 should
get a bit more baked before backports.
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5753) Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882645#comment-15882645
]
Andrei Dulceanu commented on OAK-5753:
--
Created OAK-5835 to track improvement in {{JournalReader}}. I will re-work the
patch after solving that one first.
> Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.8
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5753.patch
>
>
> To better explain the bug I'll describe the content of the revisions:
> # Valid Revision
> Adds child nodes {{a}}, {{b}}, {{c}}, {{d}}, {{e}}, {{f}} with various
> properties (blobs included)
> # Invalid Revision
> Adds child node {{z}} with some blob properties and then corrupts the
> {{NODE}} record holding {{z}}.
> Now when the consistency check is run, it correctly detects that the second
> revision is broken, *marks the path {{/z}} as corrupt* and then continues
> checking the first valid revision. Because of a check introduced for OAK-5556
> [1], which tries to validate the user provided absolute paths before checking
> them, the checker tries to check {{/z}} in the first revision, where of
> course it can't find it. Therefore the check incorrectly fails for this
> revision, although it shouldn't have to.
> /cc [~mduerig], [~frm]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5835) JournalReader should include timestamp information (if available)
Andrei Dulceanu created OAK-5835:
Summary: JournalReader should include timestamp information (if
available)
Key: OAK-5835
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5835
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: segment-tar
Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
Priority: Minor
Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
Currently the {{journal.log}} has entries like below:
{code}
1d889da9-b41c-4889-a0cd-a9aa9dcc1737:259992 root 1457408708772
{code}
At the moment {{JournalReader}} parses only the information regarding head
state (first column), without returning anything about the time at which that
revision was written (third column). This info needs to be included as well
(only if available), without enforcing any check on the format described above.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882605#comment-15882605
]
Stefan Eissing commented on OAK-3070:
-
Apart from OAK-3070, resetting {{_deletedOnce}} keeps indices small. So, seems
like a good idea anyway. And *if* it's deployed, the lower bound from OAK-3070
is not really needed in queries.
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882604#comment-15882604
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-3070:
-
The code for OAK-5704 will reset {{_deletedOnce}} already while collecting...
So VGC doesn't need to finish successfully to have an effect.
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-5751) RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15878341#comment-15878341 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-5751 at 2/24/17 12:45 PM: --- trunk: [r1784023|http://svn.apache.org/r1784023] 1.6: [r1784179|http://svn.apache.org/r1784179] 1.4: [r1784186|http://svn.apache.org/r1784186] 1.2: [r1784263|http://svn.apache.org/r1784263] 1.0: [r1784272|http://svn.apache.org/r1784272] was (Author: reschke): trunk: [r1784023|http://svn.apache.org/r1784023] 1.6: [r1784179|http://svn.apache.org/r1784179] 1.4: [r1784186|http://svn.apache.org/r1784186] 1.2: [r1784263|http://svn.apache.org/r1784263] > RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties > --- > > Key: OAK-5751 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK-5751.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5834) Remove the deprecated oak-segment module
Michael Dürig created OAK-5834:
--
Summary: Remove the deprecated oak-segment module
Key: OAK-5834
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5834
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Task
Components: segmentmk
Reporter: Michael Dürig
Priority: Minor
Fix For: 1.7.0
The {{oak-segment}} module has been deprecated for 1.6 with OAK-4247. We should
remove it entirely now:
* Remove the module
* Remove fixtures and ITs pertaining to it
* Remove references from documentation where not needed any more
An open question is how we should deal with the tooling for {{oak-segment}}.
Should we still maintain this in trunk and keep the required classes (which
very much might be all) or should we maintain the tooling on the branches? What
about new features in tooling?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5751) RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-5751: Labels: (was: candidate_oak_1_0) > RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties > --- > > Key: OAK-5751 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK-5751.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5751) RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-5751: Fix Version/s: 1.0.38 > RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties > --- > > Key: OAK-5751 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK-5751.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882596#comment-15882596
]
Vikas Saurabh edited comment on OAK-3070 at 2/24/17 12:43 PM:
--
But, iiuc, OAK-5704 won't also avoid false positives until it has reset
{{_deletedOnce}} during a successful run of gc!?
Ah!, or are you saying that resetting helps if reset phase has worked it charm
while VGC failed?
was (Author: catholicon):
But, iiuc, OAK-5704 won't also avoid false positives until it has reset
{{_deletedOnce}} during a successful run of gc!?
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882596#comment-15882596
]
Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-3070:
But, iiuc, OAK-5704 won't also avoid false positives until it has reset
{{_deletedOnce}} during a successful run of gc!?
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5753) Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882585#comment-15882585
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5753:
I think the concerns from that comment have been addressed subsequently. Wrt.
to backwards compatibility we should be better off now as we only deal with
Segment Tar, which had the timestamps from the beginning on. Still I wouldn't
rely on them being there but implement a way to expose them through the
{{JournalReader}} if they are.
> Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.8
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5753.patch
>
>
> To better explain the bug I'll describe the content of the revisions:
> # Valid Revision
> Adds child nodes {{a}}, {{b}}, {{c}}, {{d}}, {{e}}, {{f}} with various
> properties (blobs included)
> # Invalid Revision
> Adds child node {{z}} with some blob properties and then corrupts the
> {{NODE}} record holding {{z}}.
> Now when the consistency check is run, it correctly detects that the second
> revision is broken, *marks the path {{/z}} as corrupt* and then continues
> checking the first valid revision. Because of a check introduced for OAK-5556
> [1], which tries to validate the user provided absolute paths before checking
> them, the checker tries to check {{/z}} in the first revision, where of
> course it can't find it. Therefore the check incorrectly fails for this
> revision, although it shouldn't have to.
> /cc [~mduerig], [~frm]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882578#comment-15882578
]
Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-3070:
[~reschke], I didn't follow OAK-5704 closely. But about this issue, I didn't
quite understand:
{quote}
This change doesn't really help when the VGC hasn't run for a long time (nor
not at all).
The change for OAK-5704 at least guarantees that no false positive will show up
again during the query for delete candidates.
{quote}
I'm not sure if I follow this part - even with this issue fixed, setting
collection would get a timestamp for last successful run of revGc. When that
timestampe (-margin) is used as lower bound, the false positives won't be an
issue ... at least afaics.
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3134) Identify functionality offered by oak-run
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882572#comment-15882572 ] Michael Dürig commented on OAK-3134: If there are low hanging fruits (e.g. benchmark) I'm all +1. Apart from that we should solve the bandwidth problem at the infrastructure level. > Identify functionality offered by oak-run > - > > Key: OAK-3134 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task > Components: run >Reporter: Davide Giannella >Assignee: Davide Giannella > > oak-run reached the size of 50MB+ and offers indeed various functionalities > that could be moved to their own module. > This ticket is about to identify what oak-run currently offers and what/if > could be split. > ML thread: http://markmail.org/thread/w34bphrk57l7pkaz > || Functionality || Package || Module || > | Backup | | oak-operations| > | Check | | oak-operations| > | Checkpoints | | oak-operations| > | Compact | | oak-operations| > | Debug | | oak-operations| > | Explore | |oak-development | > | Groovy console | org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.console, > /oak-run/src/main/groovy/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/console | oak-operations| > | Primary | | oak-development| > | Recovery | | oak-operations| > | Repair | | oak-operations| > | Restore | | oak-operations| > | Server | | oak-development| > | Standby | | oak-development| > | Upgrade | | oak-upgrade| > | micro-benchmark | org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.benchmark |oak-development | > | scalability benchmark | org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.scalability | > oak-development| > | DataStoreCacheUpgrade | | oak-operations | > | DataStoreCheck | | oak-operations | > | Garbage | | oak-operations | > | tarmkdiff | | oak-operations | > | tarmkrecovery | | oak-operations | > | graph | | oak-development | > | history | | oak-operations | > | index | | oak-operations | > | persistentcache | | oak-operations | > | resetclusterid | | oak-operations | > | threaddump | | oak-development | > | tika | | oak-operations | > Modules left after the actions: > **oak-development** > Used to group and execute all the tools used during development. > _deployed to maven:_ No. > **oak-operations** > Used to group and execute all the tools used normally in production > environment for tasks like maintenance & C. > _deployed to maven:_ Yes. > **oak-run** > Will group what's left after the split. > _deployed to maven:_ No. > **oak-upgrade** > Will group tools for upgrading/migrating from one repo/version to another > _deployed to maven:_ yes. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5832) Make the LDAP server used in testing resilient against ports already in use
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5832?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882567#comment-15882567
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-5832:
-
Maybe just add a few retries?
> Make the LDAP server used in testing resilient against ports already in use
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-5832
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5832
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: auth-ldap
>Affects Versions: 1.0.37, 1.2.23, 1.4.13, 1.7.0, 1.6.1
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: CI, test, testability
>
> Currently {{AbstractServer.setUp()}} can fail with a {{BindException}} \[1].
> This can be caused by a small race between the time a server port is
> allocated to when the socket is already bound. At
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784251=rev we worked around the
> problem by ignoring the tests in case of a {{BindException}}. With this issue
> we should try to come up with a more fundamental solution.
> \[1]
> {noformat}
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest.testAuthenticate
> Error Message
> ERR_171 Failed to bind an LDAP service (1,028) to the service registry.
> Stacktrace
> org.apache.directory.api.ldap.model.exception.LdapConfigurationException:
> ERR_171 Failed to bind an LDAP service (1,028) to the service registry.
> at
> org.apache.directory.server.ldap.LdapServer.startNetwork(LdapServer.java:695)
> at
> org.apache.directory.server.ldap.LdapServer.start(LdapServer.java:547)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.AbstractServer.setUp(AbstractServer.java:227)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.InternalLdapServer.setUp(InternalLdapServer.java:33)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest.before(LdapProviderTest.java:85)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at
> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:50)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
> at
> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:47)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:24)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:325)
> at
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:78)
> at
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:57)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:252)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:141)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:112)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.util.ReflectionUtils.invokeMethodWithArray(ReflectionUtils.java:189)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory$ProviderProxy.invoke(ProviderFactory.java:165)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory.invokeProvider(ProviderFactory.java:85)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:115)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:75)
> Caused by: java.net.BindException: Address already in use
>
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-5753) Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882552#comment-15882552
]
Andrei Dulceanu edited comment on OAK-5753 at 2/24/17 12:25 PM:
bq. Would it be helpful to also log the timestamp along with the revisions?
+1, I think this adds value, especially for multiple check results (as the one
you provided).
bq. This would need an improvement for the {{JournalReader}} first, but since
we now have the timestamps in the journal that additional information might be
helpful.
Quickly browsing through issues, I found this comment [1] you made a while ago.
Is it still applicable? Not sure if I got it right, but iterating over a
{{}} tuple in {{JournalReader}} will not be possible for older
journals and will break compatibility. Of course, we can make some tweaks to
return {{null}} when the timestamp is not present in the journal, but I wanted
to ask this question in order not to unnecessarily complicate the code in
{{JournalReader}}.
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4095?focusedCommentId=15221468=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15221468
was (Author: dulceanu):
bq. Would it be helpful to also log the timestamp along with the revisions?
+1, I think this adds value, especially for multiple check results (as the one
you provided).
bq. This would need an improvement for the {{JournalReader}} first, but since
we now have the timestamps in the journal that additional information might be
helpful.
Quickly browsing through issues, I found this comment [1] you made a while ago.
Is it still applicable? Not sure if I got it right, but iterating over a
{{}} tuple in {{JournalReader}} will not be possible for older
journals and will break compatibility.
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4095?focusedCommentId=15221468=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15221468
> Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.8
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5753.patch
>
>
> To better explain the bug I'll describe the content of the revisions:
> # Valid Revision
> Adds child nodes {{a}}, {{b}}, {{c}}, {{d}}, {{e}}, {{f}} with various
> properties (blobs included)
> # Invalid Revision
> Adds child node {{z}} with some blob properties and then corrupts the
> {{NODE}} record holding {{z}}.
> Now when the consistency check is run, it correctly detects that the second
> revision is broken, *marks the path {{/z}} as corrupt* and then continues
> checking the first valid revision. Because of a check introduced for OAK-5556
> [1], which tries to validate the user provided absolute paths before checking
> them, the checker tries to check {{/z}} in the first revision, where of
> course it can't find it. Therefore the check incorrectly fails for this
> revision, although it shouldn't have to.
> /cc [~mduerig], [~frm]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5753) Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882552#comment-15882552
]
Andrei Dulceanu commented on OAK-5753:
--
bq. Would it be helpful to also log the timestamp along with the revisions?
+1, I think this adds value, especially for multiple check results (as the one
you provided).
bq. This would need an improvement for the {{JournalReader}} first, but since
we now have the timestamps in the journal that additional information might be
helpful.
Quickly browsing through issues, I found this comment [1] you made a while ago.
Is it still applicable? Not sure if I got it right, but iterating over a
{{}} tuple in {{JournalReader}} will not be possible for older
journals and will break compatibility.
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4095?focusedCommentId=15221468=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15221468
> Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.8
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5753.patch
>
>
> To better explain the bug I'll describe the content of the revisions:
> # Valid Revision
> Adds child nodes {{a}}, {{b}}, {{c}}, {{d}}, {{e}}, {{f}} with various
> properties (blobs included)
> # Invalid Revision
> Adds child node {{z}} with some blob properties and then corrupts the
> {{NODE}} record holding {{z}}.
> Now when the consistency check is run, it correctly detects that the second
> revision is broken, *marks the path {{/z}} as corrupt* and then continues
> checking the first valid revision. Because of a check introduced for OAK-5556
> [1], which tries to validate the user provided absolute paths before checking
> them, the checker tries to check {{/z}} in the first revision, where of
> course it can't find it. Therefore the check incorrectly fails for this
> revision, although it shouldn't have to.
> /cc [~mduerig], [~frm]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3134) Identify functionality offered by oak-run
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882546#comment-15882546 ] Davide Giannella commented on OAK-3134: --- [~tmueller] bq. "Deploying 50MB+ at time can be challenging (depending on bandwidth)." +1 that's the real issue I wanted to solve. IMHO we can go _first_ for the oak-benchmarks as it will (quickly, easily?) reduce the size of oak-run and there are some benchmarks which anyhow are cross-storage. Most if not all of the scalability can be run on any persistence AFAIR. Then from there we can see how to improve further with OAK-5437. > Identify functionality offered by oak-run > - > > Key: OAK-3134 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3134 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task > Components: run >Reporter: Davide Giannella >Assignee: Davide Giannella > > oak-run reached the size of 50MB+ and offers indeed various functionalities > that could be moved to their own module. > This ticket is about to identify what oak-run currently offers and what/if > could be split. > ML thread: http://markmail.org/thread/w34bphrk57l7pkaz > || Functionality || Package || Module || > | Backup | | oak-operations| > | Check | | oak-operations| > | Checkpoints | | oak-operations| > | Compact | | oak-operations| > | Debug | | oak-operations| > | Explore | |oak-development | > | Groovy console | org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.console, > /oak-run/src/main/groovy/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/console | oak-operations| > | Primary | | oak-development| > | Recovery | | oak-operations| > | Repair | | oak-operations| > | Restore | | oak-operations| > | Server | | oak-development| > | Standby | | oak-development| > | Upgrade | | oak-upgrade| > | micro-benchmark | org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.benchmark |oak-development | > | scalability benchmark | org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.scalability | > oak-development| > | DataStoreCacheUpgrade | | oak-operations | > | DataStoreCheck | | oak-operations | > | Garbage | | oak-operations | > | tarmkdiff | | oak-operations | > | tarmkrecovery | | oak-operations | > | graph | | oak-development | > | history | | oak-operations | > | index | | oak-operations | > | persistentcache | | oak-operations | > | resetclusterid | | oak-operations | > | threaddump | | oak-development | > | tika | | oak-operations | > Modules left after the actions: > **oak-development** > Used to group and execute all the tools used during development. > _deployed to maven:_ No. > **oak-operations** > Used to group and execute all the tools used normally in production > environment for tasks like maintenance & C. > _deployed to maven:_ Yes. > **oak-run** > Will group what's left after the split. > _deployed to maven:_ No. > **oak-upgrade** > Will group tools for upgrading/migrating from one repo/version to another > _deployed to maven:_ yes. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5787) BlobStore should be Closeable
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5787?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882517#comment-15882517
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-5787:
-
Unfortunately, Jackrabbit's {{DataStore}} has:
{noformat}
/**
* Close the data store
*
* @throws DataStoreException if a problem occurred
*/
void close() throws DataStoreException;
{noformat}
> BlobStore should be Closeable
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5787
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5787
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: blob
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Amit Jain
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> {{DocumentNodeStore}} currently calls {{close()}} if the blob store instance
> implements {{Closeable}}.
> This has led to problems where wrapper implementations did not implement it,
> and thus the actual blob store instance wasn't properly shut down.
> Proposal: make {{BlobStore}} extend {{Closeable}} and get rif of all
> {{instanceof}} checks.
> [~tmueller] [~amitjain] - feedback appreciated.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5753) Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882505#comment-15882505
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5753:
Looks good AFAICS.
Would it be helpful to also log the timestamp along with the revisions? This
would need an improvement for the {{JournalReader}} first, but since we now
have the timestamps in the journal that additional information might be
helpful. Especially in situations like this:
{noformat}
Latest good revision for path /x is b8428d1d-23d9-4995-a3c0-84b09ac93d8f:18
Latest good revision for path /y is a5a751db-3b0d-420e-ade4-34e83eb767cc:109
{noformat}
As here it would make clear which revision is actually older.
> Consistency check incorrectly fails for broken partial paths
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5753
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.8
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-5753.patch
>
>
> To better explain the bug I'll describe the content of the revisions:
> # Valid Revision
> Adds child nodes {{a}}, {{b}}, {{c}}, {{d}}, {{e}}, {{f}} with various
> properties (blobs included)
> # Invalid Revision
> Adds child node {{z}} with some blob properties and then corrupts the
> {{NODE}} record holding {{z}}.
> Now when the consistency check is run, it correctly detects that the second
> revision is broken, *marks the path {{/z}} as corrupt* and then continues
> checking the first valid revision. Because of a check introduced for OAK-5556
> [1], which tries to validate the user provided absolute paths before checking
> them, the checker tries to check {{/z}} in the first revision, where of
> course it can't find it. Therefore the check incorrectly fails for this
> revision, although it shouldn't have to.
> /cc [~mduerig], [~frm]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5704) VersionGC: reset _deletedOnce for documents that have been resurrected
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882474#comment-15882474 ] Julian Reschke commented on OAK-5704: - trunk: [r1784204|http://svn.apache.org/r1784204] [r1784128|http://svn.apache.org/r1784128] > VersionGC: reset _deletedOnce for documents that have been resurrected > -- > > Key: OAK-5704 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5704 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: documentmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_6 > Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8 > > Attachments: OAK-5704-2.diff, OAK-5704-3.diff, OAK-5704-4.diff, > OAK-5704-5.patch, OAK-5704.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5782) Test failure: persistentCache.BroadcastTest.broadcastTCP
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5782?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Mueller updated OAK-5782: Fix Version/s: (was: 1.6.1) 1.8 > Test failure: persistentCache.BroadcastTest.broadcastTCP > - > > Key: OAK-5782 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5782 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: cache, continuous integration, core >Affects Versions: 1.6.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Thomas Mueller > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu > Fix For: 1.8 > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1447 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting > #1447|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1447/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1447/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5833) Intermediate commits during (re-)indexing of synchronous index
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5833?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Mueller updated OAK-5833: Summary: Intermediate commits during (re-)indexing of synchronous index (was: Intermediate commits during sync (re-)indexing) > Intermediate commits during (re-)indexing of synchronous index > -- > > Key: OAK-5833 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5833 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Thomas Mueller >Assignee: Thomas Mueller > Fix For: 1.8 > > > Like OAK-2556, we should also support easier reindexing for synchronous > indexes. See also this [discussion > thread|https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3b30afce33d84e7c3a82cf49efc0c65bfc33db4b429d50df1e05fae7@%3Coak-dev.jackrabbit.apache.org%3E]. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5833) Intermediate commits during sync (re-)indexing
Thomas Mueller created OAK-5833: --- Summary: Intermediate commits during sync (re-)indexing Key: OAK-5833 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5833 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Reporter: Thomas Mueller Assignee: Thomas Mueller Fix For: 1.8 Like OAK-2556, we should also support easier reindexing for synchronous indexes. See also this [discussion thread|https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3b30afce33d84e7c3a82cf49efc0c65bfc33db4b429d50df1e05fae7@%3Coak-dev.jackrabbit.apache.org%3E]. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Issue Comment Deleted] (OAK-5704) VersionGC: reset _deletedOnce for documents that have been resurrected
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-5704: Comment: was deleted (was: trunk: [r1784128|http://svn.apache.org/r1784128] ) > VersionGC: reset _deletedOnce for documents that have been resurrected > -- > > Key: OAK-5704 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5704 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: documentmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_6 > Fix For: 1.7.0, 1.8 > > Attachments: OAK-5704-2.diff, OAK-5704-3.diff, OAK-5704-4.diff, > OAK-5704-5.patch, OAK-5704.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-4637) Property index: include/exclude key pattern list
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4637?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Mueller updated OAK-4637: Summary: Property index: include/exclude key pattern list (was: Property index: include/exclude pattern list) > Property index: include/exclude key pattern list > > > Key: OAK-4637 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4637 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: query >Reporter: Thomas Mueller >Assignee: Thomas Mueller >Priority: Critical > Fix For: 1.8 > > > In some cases, property indexes contain many nodes, and updating them can be > slow. Right now we have filters for node and mixin types, path (include and > exclude). > An include and exclude list of values (patterns) would be useful. For example > the property "status", if we only ever run queries with the condition "status > = 'ACTIVE'", then nodes with status INACTIVE and DONE don't need to be > indexed. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-5751) RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15878341#comment-15878341 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-5751 at 2/24/17 11:04 AM: --- trunk: [r1784023|http://svn.apache.org/r1784023] 1.6: [r1784179|http://svn.apache.org/r1784179] 1.4: [r1784186|http://svn.apache.org/r1784186] 1.2: [r1784263|http://svn.apache.org/r1784263] was (Author: reschke): trunk: [r1784023|http://svn.apache.org/r1784023] 1.6: [r1784179|http://svn.apache.org/r1784179] 1.4: [r1784186|http://svn.apache.org/r1784186] > RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties > --- > > Key: OAK-5751 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1 > > Attachments: OAK-5751.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5751) RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-5751: Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 (was: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2) > RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties > --- > > Key: OAK-5751 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1 > > Attachments: OAK-5751.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5751) RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-5751: Fix Version/s: 1.2.24 > RDBDocumentStore: properly handle null values for system properties > --- > > Key: OAK-5751 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5751 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.7.0, 1.8, 1.6.1 > > Attachments: OAK-5751.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5609) Test failure: org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest.concurrentObservers
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig updated OAK-5609: --- Attachment: unit-tests-1454.log > Test failure: > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest.concurrentObservers > - > > Key: OAK-5609 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5609 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration, core >Affects Versions: 1.0.36 >Reporter: Hudson > Labels: test-failure, windows > Fix For: 1.0.38 > > Attachments: unit-tests-1454.log, unit-tests.log > > > Jenkins Windows CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Oak-Win/ > The build Oak-Win/Windows slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK 1.8 (unlimited security) > 64-bit Windows only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting #443 has > failed. > First failed run: [Oak-Win/Windows slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK 1.8 (unlimited > security) 64-bit Windows only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting > #443|https://builds.apache.org/job/Oak-Win/Windows%20slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(unlimited%20security)%2064-bit%20Windows%20only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting/443/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Oak-Win/Windows%20slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(unlimited%20security)%2064-bit%20Windows%20only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting/443/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5831) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5831?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig resolved OAK-5831. Resolution: Duplicate > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454 failed > --- > > Key: OAK-5831 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5831 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting > #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1454/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1454/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5609) Test failure: org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest.concurrentObservers
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882448#comment-15882448
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5609:
Build 1454:
{noformat}
testExcludeSomeCommits(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest)
Time elapsed: 67.038 sec <<< FAILURE!
java.lang.AssertionError: cnt=9900
at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest.doTestExcludeSomeCommits(BackgroundObserverTest.java:423)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest.testExcludeSomeCommits(BackgroundObserverTest.java:397)
{noformat}
> Test failure:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.BackgroundObserverTest.concurrentObservers
> -
>
> Key: OAK-5609
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5609
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: continuous integration, core
>Affects Versions: 1.0.36
>Reporter: Hudson
> Labels: test-failure, windows
> Fix For: 1.0.38
>
> Attachments: unit-tests.log
>
>
> Jenkins Windows CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Oak-Win/
> The build Oak-Win/Windows slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK 1.8 (unlimited security)
> 64-bit Windows only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting #443 has
> failed.
> First failed run: [Oak-Win/Windows slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK 1.8 (unlimited
> security) 64-bit Windows only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting
> #443|https://builds.apache.org/job/Oak-Win/Windows%20slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(unlimited%20security)%2064-bit%20Windows%20only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting/443/]
> [console
> log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Oak-Win/Windows%20slaves=Windows,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(unlimited%20security)%2064-bit%20Windows%20only,nsfixtures=DOCUMENT_NS,profile=unittesting/443/console]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5830) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5830?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig resolved OAK-5830. Resolution: Duplicate > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed > > > Key: OAK-5830 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5830 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting > #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5829) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig resolved OAK-5829. Resolution: Duplicate > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed > > > Key: OAK-5829 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5829 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting > #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5828) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1453 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5828?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig resolved OAK-5828. Resolution: Duplicate > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1453 failed > --- > > Key: OAK-5828 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5828 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1453 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1453|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1453/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1453/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882436#comment-15882436
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-3070:
-
In the end we might need both.
This change doesn't really help when the VGC hasn't run for a long time (nor
not at all).
The change for OAK-5704 at least guarantees that no false positive will show up
again during the query for delete candidates.
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5485) Test failure: LdapDefaultLoginModuleTest address already in use
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5485?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig resolved OAK-5485. Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.0.38 1.4.14 1.2.24 Fixed at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784258=rev for 1.0 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784257=rev for 1.2 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784256=rev for 1.4 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784255=rev for 1.6 > Test failure: LdapDefaultLoginModuleTest address already in use > --- > > Key: OAK-5485 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5485 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: auth-ldap, continuous integration >Affects Versions: 1.4.13, 1.6.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu, windows > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.8, 1.6.1, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: unit-tests.log > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1375 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting > #1375|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1375/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1375/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-5542) Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already in use)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig resolved OAK-5542. Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.6.1 Fixed at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784258=rev for 1.0 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784257=rev for 1.2 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784256=rev for 1.4 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784255=rev for 1.6 > Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already > in use) > > > Key: OAK-5542 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: auth-ldap, continuous integration >Affects Versions: 1.0.37, 1.2.23, 1.4.13, 1.7.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu, windows > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.8, 1.6.1, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK_5542.patch > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1390 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1390|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5827) Don't use SHA-1 for new DataStore binaries
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5827?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Mueller updated OAK-5827: Attachment: OAK-5827.patch OAK-5827.patch - patch for Oak. With this patch, some of the tests in oak-blob-cloud fail, because the old Jackrabbit version is used which still uses SHA-1. So Jackrabbit will have to be changed first, then the dependency changed. > Don't use SHA-1 for new DataStore binaries > -- > > Key: OAK-5827 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5827 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Thomas Mueller > Attachments: OAK-5827.patch > > > A [collision for > SHA-1|https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/02/sha-1_collision.html] > has been published. We still use SHA-1 for the FileDataStore, and I believe > the S3 DataStore right now. Given there is a collision, we should switch to a > stronger algorithm, for example SHA-256, for new binaries. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5485) Test failure: LdapDefaultLoginModuleTest address already in use
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5485?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882329#comment-15882329 ] Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5485: Fixed at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784251=rev in trunk. > Test failure: LdapDefaultLoginModuleTest address already in use > --- > > Key: OAK-5485 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5485 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: auth-ldap, continuous integration >Affects Versions: 1.4.13, 1.6.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu, windows > Fix For: 1.8, 1.6.1 > > Attachments: unit-tests.log > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1375 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting > #1375|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1375/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1375/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5832) Make the LDAP server used in testing resilient against ports already in use
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5832?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig updated OAK-5832:
---
Affects Version/s: 1.6.1
1.7.0
1.0.37
1.2.23
1.4.13
> Make the LDAP server used in testing resilient against ports already in use
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-5832
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5832
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: auth-ldap
>Affects Versions: 1.0.37, 1.2.23, 1.4.13, 1.7.0, 1.6.1
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: CI, test, testability
>
> Currently {{AbstractServer.setUp()}} can fail with a {{BindException}} \[1].
> This can be caused by a small race between the time a server port is
> allocated to when the socket is already bound. At
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784251=rev we worked around the
> problem by ignoring the tests in case of a {{BindException}}. With this issue
> we should try to come up with a more fundamental solution.
> \[1]
> {noformat}
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest.testAuthenticate
> Error Message
> ERR_171 Failed to bind an LDAP service (1,028) to the service registry.
> Stacktrace
> org.apache.directory.api.ldap.model.exception.LdapConfigurationException:
> ERR_171 Failed to bind an LDAP service (1,028) to the service registry.
> at
> org.apache.directory.server.ldap.LdapServer.startNetwork(LdapServer.java:695)
> at
> org.apache.directory.server.ldap.LdapServer.start(LdapServer.java:547)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.AbstractServer.setUp(AbstractServer.java:227)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.InternalLdapServer.setUp(InternalLdapServer.java:33)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest.before(LdapProviderTest.java:85)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at
> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:50)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
> at
> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:47)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:24)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:325)
> at
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:78)
> at
> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:57)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
> at
> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:252)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:141)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:112)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
> at
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.util.ReflectionUtils.invokeMethodWithArray(ReflectionUtils.java:189)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory$ProviderProxy.invoke(ProviderFactory.java:165)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory.invokeProvider(ProviderFactory.java:85)
> at
> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:115)
> at
>
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-3070) Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once deleted docs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882340#comment-15882340
]
Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-3070:
--
[~reschke] Looking into this issue and OAK-5704 I am not sure whats the issue
with current approach where we track the lower bound in settings collection and
adapt the query accordingly. This looks simpler compared to OAK-5704. Probably
I am missing something here?
> Use a lower bound in VersionGC query to avoid checking unmodified once
> deleted docs
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-3070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3070
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: OAK-3070.patch, OAK-3070-updated.patch,
> OAK-3070-updated.patch
>
>
> As part of OAK-3062 [~mreutegg] suggested
> {quote}
> As a further optimization we could also limit the lower bound of the _modified
> range. The revision GC does not need to check documents with a _deletedOnce
> again if they were not modified after the last successful GC run. If they
> didn't change and were considered existing during the last run, then they
> must still exist in the current GC run. To make this work, we'd need to
> track the last successful revision GC run.
> {quote}
> Lowest last validated _modified can be possibly saved in settings collection
> and reused for next run
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5832) Make the LDAP server used in testing resilient against ports already in use
Michael Dürig created OAK-5832:
--
Summary: Make the LDAP server used in testing resilient against
ports already in use
Key: OAK-5832
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5832
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: auth-ldap
Reporter: Michael Dürig
Priority: Minor
Currently {{AbstractServer.setUp()}} can fail with a {{BindException}} \[1].
This can be caused by a small race between the time a server port is allocated
to when the socket is already bound. At
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784251=rev we worked around the problem
by ignoring the tests in case of a {{BindException}}. With this issue we should
try to come up with a more fundamental solution.
\[1]
{noformat}
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest.testAuthenticate
Error Message
ERR_171 Failed to bind an LDAP service (1,028) to the service registry.
Stacktrace
org.apache.directory.api.ldap.model.exception.LdapConfigurationException:
ERR_171 Failed to bind an LDAP service (1,028) to the service registry.
at
org.apache.directory.server.ldap.LdapServer.startNetwork(LdapServer.java:695)
at
org.apache.directory.server.ldap.LdapServer.start(LdapServer.java:547)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.AbstractServer.setUp(AbstractServer.java:227)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.InternalLdapServer.setUp(InternalLdapServer.java:33)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest.before(LdapProviderTest.java:85)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at
sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
at
org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:50)
at
org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
at
org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:47)
at
org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:24)
at
org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:325)
at
org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:78)
at
org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:57)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:290)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:71)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:288)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:58)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:268)
at
org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
at
org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:363)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:252)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:141)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:112)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at
sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.util.ReflectionUtils.invokeMethodWithArray(ReflectionUtils.java:189)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory$ProviderProxy.invoke(ProviderFactory.java:165)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory.invokeProvider(ProviderFactory.java:85)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:115)
at
org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:75)
Caused by: java.net.BindException: Address already in use
at sun.nio.ch.Net.bind0(Native Method)
at sun.nio.ch.Net.bind(Net.java:463)
at sun.nio.ch.Net.bind(Net.java:455)
at
sun.nio.ch.ServerSocketChannelImpl.bind(ServerSocketChannelImpl.java:223)
at sun.nio.ch.ServerSocketAdaptor.bind(ServerSocketAdaptor.java:74)
at
org.apache.mina.transport.socket.nio.NioSocketAcceptor.open(NioSocketAcceptor.java:198)
at
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5542) Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already in use)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882327#comment-15882327 ] Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5542: Follow up issue: OAK-5832 > Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already > in use) > > > Key: OAK-5542 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: auth-ldap, continuous integration >Affects Versions: 1.0.37, 1.2.23, 1.4.13, 1.7.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu, windows > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.8, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK_5542.patch > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1390 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1390|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5542) Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already in use)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882324#comment-15882324 ] Michael Dürig commented on OAK-5542: Fixed at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1784251=rev in trunk. [~anchela], as this is only about the test I think we should also backport. > Test failure: security.authentication.ldap.LdapProviderTest (Address already > in use) > > > Key: OAK-5542 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5542 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: auth-ldap, continuous integration >Affects Versions: 1.0.37, 1.2.23, 1.4.13, 1.7.0 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu, windows > Fix For: 1.2.24, 1.4.14, 1.8, 1.0.38 > > Attachments: OAK_5542.patch > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1390 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1390|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1390/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5792) TarMK: Implement tooling to repair broken nodes
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5792?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882298#comment-15882298
]
Andrei Dulceanu commented on OAK-5792:
--
I was thinking about the same functionality while working on OAK-5600 and
OAK-5753. It would be great to have something like {{oak-run heal/repair}}.
> TarMK: Implement tooling to repair broken nodes
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-5792
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5792
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
> Labels: production, tooling
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> With {{oak-run check}} we can determine the last good revision of a
> repository and use it to manually roll back a corrupted segment store.
> Complementary to this we should implement a tool to roll forward a broken
> revision to a fixed new revision. Such a tool needs to detect which items are
> affected by a corruption and replace these items with markers. With this the
> repository could brought back online and the markers could be used to
> identify the locations in the tree where further manual action might be
> needed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5827) Don't use SHA-1 for new DataStore binaries
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5827?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882254#comment-15882254 ] Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-5827: - As the FileDataStore and S3DataStore are also used in Jackrabbit 2.x, (jackrabbit-data), I created and linked JCR-4115. > Don't use SHA-1 for new DataStore binaries > -- > > Key: OAK-5827 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5827 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Thomas Mueller > > A [collision for > SHA-1|https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/02/sha-1_collision.html] > has been published. We still use SHA-1 for the FileDataStore, and I believe > the S3 DataStore right now. Given there is a collision, we should switch to a > stronger algorithm, for example SHA-256, for new binaries. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-2556) do intermediate commit during async indexing
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882208#comment-15882208 ] Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-2556: -- Had a discussion on DL for similar topic. See [thread|https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3b30afce33d84e7c3a82cf49efc0c65bfc33db4b429d50df1e05fae7@%3Coak-dev.jackrabbit.apache.org%3E] [~tmueller] We can use this issue to implement/work out the approach you are suggesting > do intermediate commit during async indexing > > > Key: OAK-2556 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2556 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: lucene >Affects Versions: 1.0.11 >Reporter: Stefan Egli > Labels: resilience > > A recent issue found at a customer unveils a potential issue with the async > indexer. Reading the AsyncIndexUpdate.updateIndex it looks like it is doing > the entire update of the async indexer *in one go*, ie in one commit. > When there is - for some reason - however, a huge diff that the async indexer > has to process, the 'one big commit' can become gigantic. There is no limit > to the size of the commit in fact. > So the suggestion is to do intermediate commits while the async indexer is > going on. The reason this is acceptable is the fact that by doing async > indexing, that index is anyway not 100% up-to-date - so it would not make > much of a difference if it would commit after every 100 or 1000 changes > either. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5827) Don't use SHA-1 for new DataStore binaries
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5827?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882202#comment-15882202 ] Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-5827: -- I think we can change hash algorithm and see affect on blobId etc. It can be safely done on existing setup also and would be used for only new binaries. > Don't use SHA-1 for new DataStore binaries > -- > > Key: OAK-5827 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5827 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Thomas Mueller > > A [collision for > SHA-1|https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/02/sha-1_collision.html] > has been published. We still use SHA-1 for the FileDataStore, and I believe > the S3 DataStore right now. Given there is a collision, we should switch to a > stronger algorithm, for example SHA-256, for new binaries. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5831) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454 failed
Hudson created OAK-5831: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454 failed Key: OAK-5831 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5831 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1454/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=unittesting/1454/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5830) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed
Hudson created OAK-5830: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed Key: OAK-5830 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5830 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-5829) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed
Hudson created OAK-5829: --- Summary: Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 failed Key: OAK-5829 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5829 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Bug Components: continuous integration Reporter: Hudson Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454 has failed. First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=unittesting/1454/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5828) Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1453 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5828?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15882176#comment-15882176 ] Hudson commented on OAK-5828: - Build is still failing. Failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1454|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1454/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1454/console] > Build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1453 failed > --- > > Key: OAK-5828 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5828 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.7 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting #1453 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.7 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting > #1453|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1453/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.7%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_TAR,profile=integrationTesting/1453/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)
