[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16164228#comment-16164228
]
angela commented on OAK-6318:
-
[~stillalex], now that the spi-query parts have been moved out of oak-core i
see the following next steps
- moving the {{spi.xml}} out of oak-core as you propose
- {{ConfigurationUtil}} is definitely misplaced in the spi package... maybe
moving to the tests or to _o.a.j.oak.security_?
- regarding the string constants: i don't know what would be the best approach
here but i found that moving out _plugins.document_ out of oak-core will
face the same issue. maybe introducing new constants somewhere in the _spi_
package space and have once in _plugins.*_ extend from those?
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6353) Use Document order traversal for reindexing performed on DocumentNodeStore setups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6353?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16164170#comment-16164170 ] Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-6353: -- Based on some tests done by [~chibulcu] for 100M nodes * Simple DBCursor traversal - ~50 mins , 82k docs/sec * NodeStore traversal ** From a remote setup - 1.2d ** From a local setup (on same machine as Mongo) - 8 hrs, 8k docs/sec So to perform full reindexing on such setups we would need to make better use of Document order traversal > Use Document order traversal for reindexing performed on DocumentNodeStore > setups > - > > Key: OAK-6353 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6353 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: run >Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra >Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra > Fix For: 1.8 > > Attachments: OAK-6353-v1.patch, OAK-6353-v2.patch > > > [~tmueller] suggested > [here|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6246?focusedCommentId=16034442&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16034442] > that document order traversal can be faster compared to current mode of path > based traversal. Initial test indicate that such a traversal can be order of > magnitude faster. > So this task is meant to implement such an approach and see if it can be a > viable indexing mode used for DocumentNodeStore based setups -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163899#comment-16163899 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #738|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/738/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/738/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6562) OakDirectory should recreate file node upon create
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6562?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Vikas Saurabh resolved OAK-6562. Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.7.8 Fixed in trunk at [r1808187|https://svn.apache.org/r1808187]. [~chetanm], can you please take a quick look? > OakDirectory should recreate file node upon create > -- > > Key: OAK-6562 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6562 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: lucene >Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra >Assignee: Vikas Saurabh >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8 > > Original Estimate: 48h > Remaining Estimate: 48h > > OakDirectory currently returns a child builder for openOuput call for a index > file. Instead of just returning a new builder it should first remove existing > NodeState (if any) and then return a new builder. > This would be confirming to Lucene FSDirectory implementation -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6656) OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163492#comment-16163492
]
Vikas Saurabh edited comment on OAK-6656 at 9/12/17 10:06 PM:
--
Fixed in trunk at [r1808142|https://svn.apache.org/r1808142]. Thanks to
[~chetanm] for hinting that {{ContextAwareCallback}} could be utilized to get
index path.
was (Author: catholicon):
Fixed in trunk at [r1808142|https://svn.apache.org/r1808142].
> OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate
> leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: indexing
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7, 1.4.18, 1.6.5
>Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_4, candidate_oak_1_6
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> OAK-3768 removed support for {{ordered}} property index but the intention of
> the removal was that presence of ordered index should only log a WARN every
> now and then (10k times on invocation of EditorProvider).
> But, it returns {{null}} editor which is takes as there is no provider of
> ordered index. Which, in turn, as the config be, can fail commits (or async
> indexing if index was async).
> We should handle this gracefully.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163573#comment-16163573
]
Robert Munteanu commented on OAK-6318:
--
Right, from the Maven POV we can't get away with it.
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163565#comment-16163565 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #737|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/737/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/737/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163507#comment-16163507
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-6641:
-
Happened once again:
{noformat}
testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
Time elapsed: 116.359 sec <<< ERROR!
java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
blobId
[8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
Caused by: java.io.IOException:
org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not exist
Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not exist
{noformat}
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-6641.patch
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Reopened] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Reschke reopened OAK-6641:
-
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-6641.patch
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6656) OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Vikas Saurabh resolved OAK-6656.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.7.8
Fixed in trunk at [r1808142|https://svn.apache.org/r1808142].
> OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate
> leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: indexing
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7, 1.4.18, 1.6.5
>Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_4, candidate_oak_1_6
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> OAK-3768 removed support for {{ordered}} property index but the intention of
> the removal was that presence of ordered index should only log a WARN every
> now and then (10k times on invocation of EditorProvider).
> But, it returns {{null}} editor which is takes as there is no provider of
> ordered index. Which, in turn, as the config be, can fail commits (or async
> indexing if index was async).
> We should handle this gracefully.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163402#comment-16163402 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #736|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/736/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/736/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163266#comment-16163266 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #735|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/735/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/735/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6656) OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163156#comment-16163156
]
Vikas Saurabh edited comment on OAK-6656 at 9/12/17 4:04 PM:
-
Added ignored test at [r1808128|https://svn.apache.org/r1808128].
[~chetanm], while a very simple fix \[0] is add {{ordered}} to
{{MissingIndexProviderStrategy#ignore}} set. While that works as intended but
the log message isn't descriptive enough - basically there's no information
about which definition is being complained about. Inside the provider we do
have definition NodeState which we can log - that can be 'hint' enough to find
which index is being talked about. But, I was wondering if we can somehow get
the path information there. Any ideas?
\[0]:
{noformat}
diff --git
a/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/IndexUpdate.java
b/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/IndexUpdate.java
index 4d93bc6d4e..6805fe5f03 100644
---
a/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/IndexUpdate.java
+++
b/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/IndexUpdate.java
@@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ public class IndexUpdate implements Editor, PathSource {
private boolean failOnMissingIndexProvider = Boolean
.getBoolean("oak.indexUpdate.failOnMissingIndexProvider");
-private final Set ignore = newHashSet("disabled");
+private final Set ignore = newHashSet("disabled", "ordered");
public void onMissingIndex(String type, NodeBuilder definition, String
indexPath)
throws CommitFailedException {
diff --git
a/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedIndex.java
b/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedIndex.java
index c8d5ec489e..e2ccb2e0d2 100644
---
a/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedIndex.java
+++
b/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedIndex.java
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ public interface OrderedIndex {
*/
String DEPRECATION_MESSAGE =
"Ordered Index has been deprecated since Oak 1.1.8. " +
-"Please replace the index definitions with Lucene Property index " +
+"Please replace the index definition ({}) with Lucene Property index "
+
"and remove the index providers from the repository. " +
"See docs at http://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs";;
diff --git
a/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider.java
b/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider.java
index 3c9270dade..c64adf522a 100644
---
a/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider.java
+++
b/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/property/OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider.java
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ public class OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider implements
IndexEditorProvider,
@Nonnull IndexUpdateCallback callback) throws
CommitFailedException {
if (OrderedIndex.TYPE.equals(type)) {
if (hit() % threshold == 0) {
-LOG.warn(OrderedIndex.DEPRECATION_MESSAGE);
+LOG.warn(OrderedIndex.DEPRECATION_MESSAGE, definition);
}
}
return null;
{noformat}
was (Author: catholicon):
Added ignored test at [r1808128|https://svn.apache.org/r1808128].
[~chetanm], while a very simple fix is add {{ordered}} to
{{MissingIndexProviderStrategy#ignore}} set. While that works as intended but
the log message isn't descriptive enough - basically there's no information
about which definition is being complained about. Inside the provider we do
have definition NodeState which we can log - that can be 'hint' enough to find
which index is being talked about. But, I was wondering if we can somehow get
the path information there. Any ideas?
> OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate
> leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: indexing
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7, 1.4.18, 1.6.5
>Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_4, candidate_oak_1_6
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> OAK-3768 removed support for {{ordered}} property index but the intention of
> the removal was
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163161#comment-16163161
]
Alex Deparvu commented on OAK-6318:
---
bq. but NamespaceConstants and NodeTypeConstants might not pose problems.
hmm. ok, but if you consider {{spi.security}} a different bundle, this
reference means that it would have to have a (maven) dependency on
{{oak-core}}, which will introduce a cyclic dependency, no? ({{oak-core}}
should depend on this new bundle, not the other way around)
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6656) OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163156#comment-16163156
]
Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-6656:
Added ignored test at [r1808128|https://svn.apache.org/r1808128].
[~chetanm], while a very simple fix is add {{ordered}} to
{{MissingIndexProviderStrategy#ignore}} set. While that works as intended but
the log message isn't descriptive enough - basically there's no information
about which definition is being complained about. Inside the provider we do
have definition NodeState which we can log - that can be 'hint' enough to find
which index is being talked about. But, I was wondering if we can somehow get
the path information there. Any ideas?
> OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate
> leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: indexing
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7, 1.4.18, 1.6.5
>Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
>Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_4, candidate_oak_1_6
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> OAK-3768 removed support for {{ordered}} property index but the intention of
> the removal was that presence of ordered index should only log a WARN every
> now and then (10k times on invocation of EditorProvider).
> But, it returns {{null}} editor which is takes as there is no provider of
> ordered index. Which, in turn, as the config be, can fail commits (or async
> indexing if index was async).
> We should handle this gracefully.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6628) More precise indexRules support via filtering criteria on property
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163154#comment-16163154
]
Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-6628:
--
This looks better and enables future extensions
> More precise indexRules support via filtering criteria on property
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6628
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6628
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: lucene
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> For Lucene index we currently support indexRules based on nodetype. Here the
> recommendation is that users must use most precise nodeType/mixinType to
> target the indexing rule so that only relevant nodes are indexed.
> For many Sling based applications its being seen that lots of content is
> nt:unstructured and it uses {{sling:resourceType}} property to distinguish
> various such nt:unstructured nodes. Currently its not possible to target
> index definition to index only those nt:unstructured which have specific
> {{sling:resourceType}}. Which makes it harder to provide a more precise index
> definitions.
> To help such cases we can generalize the indexRule support via a filtering
> criteria
> {noformat}
> activityIndex
> - type = "lucene"
> + indexRules
> + nt:unstructured
> - filter-property = "sling:resourceType"
> - filter-value = "app/activitystreams/components/activity"
> + properties
> - jcr:primaryType = "nt:unstructured"
> + verb
> - propertyIndex = true
> - name = "verb"
> {noformat}
> So indexRule would have 2 more config properties
> * filter-property - Name of property to match
> * filter-value - The value to match
> *Indexing*
> At time of indexing currently LuceneIndexEditor does a
> {{indexDefinition.getApplicableIndexingRule}} passing it the NodeState.
> Currently this checks only for jcr:PrimaryType and jxr:mixins to find
> matching rule.
> This logic would need to be extended to also check if any filter-property is
> defined in definition. If yes then check if NodeState has that value
> *Querying*
> On query side we need to change the IndexPlanner where it currently use query
> nodetype for finding matching indexRule. In addition it would need to pass on
> the property restrictions and the rule only be matched if the property
> restriction matches the filter
> *Open Item*
> # How to handle change in filter-property value. I think we have similar
> problem currently if an index nodes nodeType gets changed. In such a case we
> do not remove it from index. So we need to solve that for both
> # Ensure that all places where rules are matched account for this filter
> concept
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6656) OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor to IndexUpdate leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
Vikas Saurabh created OAK-6656:
--
Summary: OrderedPropertyIndexEditorProvider does not return Editor
to IndexUpdate leading to "ordered" being marked as missing type
Key: OAK-6656
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6656
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Bug
Components: indexing
Affects Versions: 1.6.5, 1.4.18, 1.7.7
Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
Fix For: 1.8
OAK-3768 removed support for {{ordered}} property index but the intention of
the removal was that presence of ordered index should only log a WARN every now
and then (10k times on invocation of EditorProvider).
But, it returns {{null}} editor which is takes as there is no provider of
ordered index. Which, in turn, as the config be, can fail commits (or async
indexing if index was async).
We should handle this gracefully.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163127#comment-16163127 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #734|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/734/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/734/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6628) More precise indexRules support via filtering criteria on property
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163073#comment-16163073
]
Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-6628:
-
> Ensure that all places where rules are matched account for this filter concept
I think this refers to: filter properties need to be checked while indexing,
and while running queries.
What about a slightly more general data format, which allows to add more
features in the future if needed. For example, I'm not sure if we need to
support resource type prefixes and multi-value (lists). Also, filtering by
multiple properties seems useful.
{noformat}
activityIndex
- type = "lucene"
+ indexRules
+ nt:unstructured
+ filters
+ sling:resourceType
- value = "app/activitystreams/components/activity"
+ properties
- jcr:primaryType = "nt:unstructured"
+ verb
- propertyIndex = true
- name = "verb"
{noformat}
Possible extensions. Not for now, but possibly in the future, if needed:
* Support for multiple properties, eg. relType value = 'USER', combined with a
certain sling:resourceType
* Support for multi-value lists (value = ['a', 'b',...])
* Support for prefixes (prefix = 'app/activitystream')
* Support for exclude lists / prefixes (excludedValue = 'x', excludedPrefix =
'app/')
* Support to filter by existence of a certain property, eg. fileReference, with
"exists = true"
The above data format would allow for such extensions, while the data format
"filter-property = x, filter-value = y" seems rather restricting (not
extensible).
> More precise indexRules support via filtering criteria on property
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6628
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6628
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: lucene
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> For Lucene index we currently support indexRules based on nodetype. Here the
> recommendation is that users must use most precise nodeType/mixinType to
> target the indexing rule so that only relevant nodes are indexed.
> For many Sling based applications its being seen that lots of content is
> nt:unstructured and it uses {{sling:resourceType}} property to distinguish
> various such nt:unstructured nodes. Currently its not possible to target
> index definition to index only those nt:unstructured which have specific
> {{sling:resourceType}}. Which makes it harder to provide a more precise index
> definitions.
> To help such cases we can generalize the indexRule support via a filtering
> criteria
> {noformat}
> activityIndex
> - type = "lucene"
> + indexRules
> + nt:unstructured
> - filter-property = "sling:resourceType"
> - filter-value = "app/activitystreams/components/activity"
> + properties
> - jcr:primaryType = "nt:unstructured"
> + verb
> - propertyIndex = true
> - name = "verb"
> {noformat}
> So indexRule would have 2 more config properties
> * filter-property - Name of property to match
> * filter-value - The value to match
> *Indexing*
> At time of indexing currently LuceneIndexEditor does a
> {{indexDefinition.getApplicableIndexingRule}} passing it the NodeState.
> Currently this checks only for jcr:PrimaryType and jxr:mixins to find
> matching rule.
> This logic would need to be extended to also check if any filter-property is
> defined in definition. If yes then check if NodeState has that value
> *Querying*
> On query side we need to change the IndexPlanner where it currently use query
> nodetype for finding matching indexRule. In addition it would need to pass on
> the property restrictions and the rule only be matched if the property
> restriction matches the filter
> *Open Item*
> # How to handle change in filter-property value. I think we have similar
> problem currently if an index nodes nodeType gets changed. In such a case we
> do not remove it from index. So we need to solve that for both
> # Ensure that all places where rules are matched account for this filter
> concept
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16163052#comment-16163052
]
Robert Munteanu commented on OAK-6318:
--
I _think_ that if you only import String constants then {{javac}} will inline
the strings at compile time and {{bnd}} will not generate any
{{Import-Package}} statements as there are no Java imports. To be checked - but
{{NamespaceConstants}} and {{NodeTypeConstants}} might not pose problems.
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6655) Update travis build configuration
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6655?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Marcel Reutegger resolved OAK-6655. --- Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.7.8 Changed in trunk: http://svn.apache.org/r1808125 > Update travis build configuration > - > > Key: OAK-6655 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6655 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Marcel Reutegger >Assignee: Marcel Reutegger >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8 > > > Travis recently updated their workers to Ubuntu trusty and some of the > customizations in the .travis.yml are now unnecessary. By default, MongoDB > version is now 3.2.15 and Oracle JDK 1.8 on build 131. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6655) Update travis build configuration
Marcel Reutegger created OAK-6655: - Summary: Update travis build configuration Key: OAK-6655 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6655 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Task Reporter: Marcel Reutegger Assignee: Marcel Reutegger Priority: Minor Fix For: 1.8 Travis recently updated their workers to Ubuntu trusty and some of the customizations in the .travis.yml are now unnecessary. By default, MongoDB version is now 3.2.15 and Oracle JDK 1.8 on build 131. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrei Dulceanu resolved OAK-6641.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed at r1808124.
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-6641.patch
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162918#comment-16162918
]
Alex Deparvu edited comment on OAK-6318 at 9/12/17 1:33 PM:
[~anchela] I can't tell if this is implied or not but isn't this also blocked
by the dependency to the {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.xml}} package which is
still in {{oak-core}}? It could easily move to {{oak-store-spi}}, it seems.
[edit]
Also from oak-core:
* {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.namepath.NamePathMapper}}
* {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.name.NamespaceConstants}}
* {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.nodetype.NodeTypeConstants}}
* ConfigurationUtil depends on
{{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.token.TokenLoginModule}} and
{{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.security.authentication.user.LoginModuleImpl}},
which I think is the wrong way around
was (Author: alex.parvulescu):
[~anchela] I can't tell if this is implied or not but isn't this also blocked
by the dependency to the {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.xml}} package which is
still in {{oak-core}}? It could easily move to {{oak-store-spi}}, it seems.
[edit] Also {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.namepath.NamePathMapper}} is a hard one.
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162918#comment-16162918
]
Alex Deparvu edited comment on OAK-6318 at 9/12/17 1:24 PM:
[~anchela] I can't tell if this is implied or not but isn't this also blocked
by the dependency to the {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.xml}} package which is
still in {{oak-core}}? It could easily move to {{oak-store-spi}}, it seems.
[edit] Also {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.namepath.NamePathMapper}} is a hard one.
was (Author: alex.parvulescu):
[~anchela] I can't tell if this is implied or not but isn't this also blocked
by the dependency to the {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.xml}} package which is
still in {{oak-core}}? It could easily move to {{oak-store-spi}}, it seems.
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6648) test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162924#comment-16162924
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-6648:
bq. I think we should not ship a load that is known to fail.
But according to this reasoning all of these
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20OAK%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20test-failure
(and probably many more) should be blockers.
> test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6648
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: test-failure, windows
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@6bb75258
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6318) Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162918#comment-16162918
]
Alex Deparvu commented on OAK-6318:
---
[~anchela] I can't tell if this is implied or not but isn't this also blocked
by the dependency to the {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.xml}} package which is
still in {{oak-core}}? It could easily move to {{oak-store-spi}}, it seems.
> Refactor oak.spi.security into a separate module/bundle
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6318
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6318
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core, security
>Reporter: angela
>
> In the light of the modularization effort it would IMHO make a lot of sense
> to refactor _oak.spi.security.*_ into a separate module/bundle that could be
> release independent of _oak-core_.
> As far as I could see so far this is currently not easily doable due to the
> dependency of {{oak.spi.security.*}} on {{oak.plugins.tree}}, which in turn
> relies on {{o.a.j.oak.query.QueryEngineSettings}} and other oak-core
> internals (see also OAK-6304). Most likely this issue would therefore require
> a complete review (and possibly a split) of the {{oak.plugins.tree}} package
> space which contains a mixture of utilities and 'API' (like e.g.
> {{TreeContext}} and {{TreeLocation}})... will open a separate issue for this
> linking to this one.
> cc: [~alex.parvulescu], [~rombert], [~mduerig], [~tmueller]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6648) test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162914#comment-16162914
]
Davide Giannella commented on OAK-6648:
---
[~mduerig]
bq. could you share a rational why this issue should block the release?
I think we should not ship a load that is known to fail. Even if it's for a
specific platform. It may be a test problem; but nevertheless I think it should
be fixed.
> test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6648
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: test-failure, windows
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@6bb75258
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162913#comment-16162913
]
Davide Giannella commented on OAK-6641:
---
[~mduerig]
bq. could you share a rational why this issue should block the release?
I think we should not ship a load that is known to fail. Even if it's for a
specific platform. It may be a test problem; but nevertheless I think it should
be fixed.
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-6641.patch
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Assigned] (OAK-6654) Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Marcel Reutegger reassigned OAK-6654: - Assignee: Marcel Reutegger > Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes > -- > > Key: OAK-6654 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: jcr >Reporter: Marcel Reutegger >Assignee: Marcel Reutegger >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.8 > > > There is quite a bit of duplicate initialization code in the various > OakRepositoryStub classes. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6654) Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Marcel Reutegger updated OAK-6654: -- Summary: Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes (was: Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryS) > Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes > -- > > Key: OAK-6654 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: jcr >Reporter: Marcel Reutegger >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.8 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6654) Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Marcel Reutegger updated OAK-6654: -- Fix Version/s: 1.8 Description: There is quite a bit of duplicate initialization code in the various OakRepositoryStub classes. Component/s: jcr > Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryStub classes > -- > > Key: OAK-6654 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: jcr >Reporter: Marcel Reutegger >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.8 > > > There is quite a bit of duplicate initialization code in the various > OakRepositoryStub classes. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6654) Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryS
Marcel Reutegger created OAK-6654: - Summary: Remove duplicate code in OakRepositoryS Key: OAK-6654 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6654 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Reporter: Marcel Reutegger Priority: Minor -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162902#comment-16162902 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #733|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/733/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/733/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6653) Standby server must always send the persisted head to clients
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6653?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162900#comment-16162900
]
Andrei Dulceanu commented on OAK-6653:
--
[~frm], I was thinking the same. I will implement the changes and ping you for
a review when the patch is ready. Thank you!
> Standby server must always send the persisted head to clients
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6653
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6653
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.7.8
>
>
> Currently the standby server sends an un-persisted head record to clients.
> Under normal circumstances, the TarMK flush thread is able to persist it and
> its corresponding segment at a 5 seconds interval.
> However, there are cases (uploading a very large blob > 10 GB) in which the
> flush thread writes the segment too late, and the 20s allowed by
> {{FileStoreUtil#readSegmentWithRetry}} are not enough. Therefore the server
> can't read the segment containing the head record and a timeout occurs on the
> client.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Assigned] (OAK-5656) InitialContent depends on document.bundlor.BundlingConfigInitializer
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marcel Reutegger reassigned OAK-5656:
-
Assignee: Marcel Reutegger
Priority: Minor (was: Major)
I'll work on a proposal and attach a patch...
> InitialContent depends on document.bundlor.BundlingConfigInitializer
>
>
> Key: OAK-5656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
>Reporter: angela
>Assignee: Marcel Reutegger
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: modularization, tech-debt
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> [~chetanm], in the light of OAK-4975 a dependency to the document nodestore
> code got introduced in
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.nodetype.write.InitialContent}} by adding
> the following line:
> {code}
> BundlingConfigInitializer.INSTANCE.initialize(builder);
> {code}
> the {{BundlingConfigInitializer}} is defined in the
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.bundlor}}.
> To me that looks quite troublesome and I don't think the generic
> JCR-InitialContent should have any dependency on the document nodestore code
> base.
> Why not defining a dedicated {{RepositoryInitializer}} for that kind of init
> an making sure it is listed in the (default) setup scenarios (or at least in
> those that actually have a document store and thus require this)?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6653) Standby server must always send the persisted head to clients
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6653?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162898#comment-16162898
]
Francesco Mari commented on OAK-6653:
-
I think the best option is to expose the persisted head as a new method from
{{Revisions}}, and use that method in {{DefaultStandbyHeadReader}} to read the
{{RecordId}} of the head state.
> Standby server must always send the persisted head to clients
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6653
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6653
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.7.8
>
>
> Currently the standby server sends an un-persisted head record to clients.
> Under normal circumstances, the TarMK flush thread is able to persist it and
> its corresponding segment at a 5 seconds interval.
> However, there are cases (uploading a very large blob > 10 GB) in which the
> flush thread writes the segment too late, and the 20s allowed by
> {{FileStoreUtil#readSegmentWithRetry}} are not enough. Therefore the server
> can't read the segment containing the head record and a timeout occurs on the
> client.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5656) InitialContent depends on document.bundlor.BundlingConfigInitializer
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162894#comment-16162894
]
angela commented on OAK-5656:
-
[~mreutegg], glad to hear. Who is going to take care of it?
> InitialContent depends on document.bundlor.BundlingConfigInitializer
>
>
> Key: OAK-5656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
>Reporter: angela
> Labels: modularization, tech-debt
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> [~chetanm], in the light of OAK-4975 a dependency to the document nodestore
> code got introduced in
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.nodetype.write.InitialContent}} by adding
> the following line:
> {code}
> BundlingConfigInitializer.INSTANCE.initialize(builder);
> {code}
> the {{BundlingConfigInitializer}} is defined in the
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.bundlor}}.
> To me that looks quite troublesome and I don't think the generic
> JCR-InitialContent should have any dependency on the document nodestore code
> base.
> Why not defining a dedicated {{RepositoryInitializer}} for that kind of init
> an making sure it is listed in the (default) setup scenarios (or at least in
> those that actually have a document store and thus require this)?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5656) InitialContent depends on document.bundlor.BundlingConfigInitializer
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162887#comment-16162887
]
Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-5656:
---
I would also like to move this out of InitialContent / oak-core. It is
currently the only dependency that prevents us from moving the
DocumentNodeStore implementation to a separate bundle.
How about leaving it up to the application to decide whether it wants to setup
bundling of jcr:content node into the parent nt:file node? Both {{Oak}} and
{{Jcr}} builder classes have a {{with(RepositoryInitializer)}} method that can
be used.
> InitialContent depends on document.bundlor.BundlingConfigInitializer
>
>
> Key: OAK-5656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5656
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
>Reporter: angela
> Labels: modularization, tech-debt
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> [~chetanm], in the light of OAK-4975 a dependency to the document nodestore
> code got introduced in
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.nodetype.write.InitialContent}} by adding
> the following line:
> {code}
> BundlingConfigInitializer.INSTANCE.initialize(builder);
> {code}
> the {{BundlingConfigInitializer}} is defined in the
> {{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.bundlor}}.
> To me that looks quite troublesome and I don't think the generic
> JCR-InitialContent should have any dependency on the document nodestore code
> base.
> Why not defining a dedicated {{RepositoryInitializer}} for that kind of init
> an making sure it is listed in the (default) setup scenarios (or at least in
> those that actually have a document store and thus require this)?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6653) Standby server must always send the persisted head to clients
Andrei Dulceanu created OAK-6653:
Summary: Standby server must always send the persisted head to
clients
Key: OAK-6653
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6653
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Bug
Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
Affects Versions: 1.7.7
Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
Fix For: 1.7.8
Currently the standby server sends an un-persisted head record to clients.
Under normal circumstances, the TarMK flush thread is able to persist it and
its corresponding segment at a 5 seconds interval.
However, there are cases (uploading a very large blob > 10 GB) in which the
flush thread writes the segment too late, and the 20s allowed by
{{FileStoreUtil#readSegmentWithRetry}} are not enough. Therefore the server
can't read the segment containing the head record and a timeout occurs on the
client.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6652) RDB*Store: update postgresql JDBC driver reference to 42.1.4
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6652?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-6652: Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 candidate_oak_1_6 (was: ) > RDB*Store: update postgresql JDBC driver reference to 42.1.4 > > > Key: OAK-6652 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6652 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4, > candidate_oak_1_6 > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6652) RDB*Store: update postgresql JDBC driver reference to 42.1.4
Julian Reschke created OAK-6652: --- Summary: RDB*Store: update postgresql JDBC driver reference to 42.1.4 Key: OAK-6652 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6652 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Task Components: rdbmk Reporter: Julian Reschke Assignee: Julian Reschke Priority: Minor -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6651) new release checksum requirements
Julian Reschke created OAK-6651: --- Summary: new release checksum requirements Key: OAK-6651 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6651 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Reporter: Davide Giannella Assignee: Davide Giannella Fix For: 1.8 As of various SHA algorithm the Apache policies around signatures and checksums changed requiring to specify the sha algorithm as part of the file extension: sha1, sha256, sha512. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums currently Oak signs with sha-1 and we should at least change the file extension -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andrei Dulceanu updated OAK-6641:
-
Attachment: OAK-6641.patch
[~reschke], as discussed offline, I think the problem was caused by
{{InputStream}}s instances left open in the tests. Could you please apply the
patch attached and re-test on your machine?
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-6641.patch
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6616) Update Oak trunk to Jackrabbit 2.15.6
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6616?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke resolved OAK-6616. - Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.7.8 trunk: [r1808109|http://svn.apache.org/r1808109] > Update Oak trunk to Jackrabbit 2.15.6 > - > > Key: OAK-6616 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6616 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task > Components: parent >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.7.8 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6650) new release checksum requirements
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6650?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162836#comment-16162836 ] Davide Giannella commented on OAK-6650: --- feature branch for patching: https://github.com/davidegiannella/jackrabbit-oak/compare/trunk...davidegiannella:OAK-6650?expand=1 > new release checksum requirements > - > > Key: OAK-6650 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6650 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Davide Giannella >Assignee: Davide Giannella > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4, > candidate_oak_1_6 > Fix For: 1.8 > > > As of various SHA algorithm the Apache policies around signatures and > checksums changed requiring to specify the sha algorithm as part of the file > extension: sha1, sha256, sha512. > http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums > currently Oak signs with sha-1 and we should at least change the file > extension -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6650) new release checksum requirements
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6650?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Davide Giannella updated OAK-6650: -- Fix Version/s: 1.8 > new release checksum requirements > - > > Key: OAK-6650 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6650 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement >Reporter: Davide Giannella >Assignee: Davide Giannella > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4, > candidate_oak_1_6 > Fix For: 1.8 > > > As of various SHA algorithm the Apache policies around signatures and > checksums changed requiring to specify the sha algorithm as part of the file > extension: sha1, sha256, sha512. > http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums > currently Oak signs with sha-1 and we should at least change the file > extension -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6650) new release checksum requirements
Davide Giannella created OAK-6650: - Summary: new release checksum requirements Key: OAK-6650 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6650 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Reporter: Davide Giannella Assignee: Davide Giannella As of various SHA algorithm the Apache policies around signatures and checksums changed requiring to specify the sha algorithm as part of the file extension: sha1, sha256, sha512. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums currently Oak signs with sha-1 and we should at least change the file extension -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6616) Update Oak trunk to Jackrabbit 2.15.6
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6616?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-6616: Component/s: parent > Update Oak trunk to Jackrabbit 2.15.6 > - > > Key: OAK-6616 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6616 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task > Components: parent >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162802#comment-16162802 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #732|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/732/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/732/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6509) Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162761#comment-16162761 ] Hudson commented on OAK-6509: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #731|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/731/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/731/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #598 failed > > > Key: OAK-6509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson > > Jenkins CI failure: https://builds.apache.org/view/J/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/ > The build Jackrabbit Oak #598 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #598|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/598/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6535) Synchronous Lucene Property Indexes
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6535?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16150257#comment-16150257
]
Chetan Mehrotra edited comment on OAK-6535 at 9/12/17 9:33 AM:
---
Feature branch
https://github.com/chetanmeh/jackrabbit-oak/compare/trunk...chetanmeh:OAK-6535
# Add {{PropertyUpdateCallback}} which is invoked for each indexed property
change (/)
# PropertyUpdateCallback based on property index
## For normal index
### Value pattern support (/)
## For unique index
### Check for unique ness constraint (/)
### Store the created time (/)
# Cleanup support
## Cleaner implementation (/)
## Configure a periodic task
# Query Support
## PropertyIndexLookup variant for hybrid (/)
## Index Planner integration
## Cursor union
was (Author: chetanm):
Feature branch
https://github.com/chetanmeh/jackrabbit-oak/compare/trunk...chetanmeh:OAK-6535
# Add {{PropertyUpdateCallback}} which is invoked for each indexed property
change (/)
# PropertyUpdateCallback based on property index
## For normal index
### Value pattern support (/)
## For unique index
### Check for unique ness constraint (/)
### Store the created time
# Cleanup support
# Query Support
> Synchronous Lucene Property Indexes
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6535
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6535
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: lucene, property-index
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> Oak 1.6 added support for Lucene Hybrid Index (OAK-4412). That enables near
> real time (NRT) support for Lucene based indexes. It also had a limited
> support for sync indexes. This feature aims to improve that to next level and
> enable support for sync property indexes.
> More details at
> https://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/Synchronous%20Lucene%20Property%20Indexes
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6649) Provide callback support for newly inserted entries in unique index
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6649?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162728#comment-16162728
]
Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-6649:
Added {{Nonnull}} annotation to consumer param in c'tor in
[r1808089|https://svn.apache.org/r1808089].
> Provide callback support for newly inserted entries in unique index
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6649
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6649
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Technical task
> Components: property-index
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> For pruning old entries from unique index we need to add created time for
> entries created in unique index. To support that I would like to add a
> callback support which would be invoked for UniqueEntryStoreStrategy for
> every new entry
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6649) Provide callback support for newly inserted entries in unique index
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6649?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Chetan Mehrotra resolved OAK-6649. -- Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.7.8 Done with 1808088 > Provide callback support for newly inserted entries in unique index > --- > > Key: OAK-6649 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6649 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: property-index >Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra >Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8 > > > For pruning old entries from unique index we need to add created time for > entries created in unique index. To support that I would like to add a > callback support which would be invoked for UniqueEntryStoreStrategy for > every new entry -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6648) test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162714#comment-16162714
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-6648:
[~edivad], could you share a rational why this issue should block the release?
> test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6648
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: test-failure, windows
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@6bb75258
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = prope
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16162713#comment-16162713
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-6641:
[~edivad], could you share a rational why this issue should block the release?
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6649) Provide callback support for newly inserted entries in unique index
Chetan Mehrotra created OAK-6649: Summary: Provide callback support for newly inserted entries in unique index Key: OAK-6649 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6649 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Technical task Components: property-index Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra Priority: Minor Fix For: 1.8 For pruning old entries from unique index we need to add created time for entries created in unique index. To support that I would like to add a callback support which would be invoked for UniqueEntryStoreStrategy for every new entry -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6648) test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Davide Giannella updated OAK-6648:
--
Fix Version/s: 1.7.8
> test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6648
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: test-failure, windows
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@6bb75258
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6641) test failure in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Davide Giannella updated OAK-6641:
--
Priority: Blocker (was: Major)
> test failure in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6641
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6641
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, tarmk-standby
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: cold-standby
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 99.858 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 71.122 sec <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Error occurred while obtaining InputStream for
> blobId
> [8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4#1073741824]
> Caused by: java.io.IOException:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> Caused by: org.apache.jackrabbit.core.data.DataStoreException: Record
> 8098b6ac1491be80b7e58a85767ede178c432866d90caf6726f556406ecc84a4 does not
> exist
> {noformat}
> (might be specific to Windows)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6648) test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Davide Giannella updated OAK-6648:
--
Priority: Blocker (was: Major)
> test failure seen in org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
>
>
> Key: OAK-6648
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6648
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Blocker
> Labels: test-failure, windows
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> {noformat}
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.upgrade.UpgradeIT
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@6bb75258
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node-5-2 =
> { ... }, node-5-7 = { ... }, node-5-8 = { ... }, node-5-5 = { ... }, node-5-0
> = { ... }, node-5-6 = { ... } }
> Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.1
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.document.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.plugins.segment.*,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeBuilder,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.EmptyHook,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.CommitInfo
> ===> true
> ===> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.SegmentNodeStore@5b04476e
> ===> SegmentNodeBuilder{path=/}
> ===> null
> ===> { property-name-5-0 = property-value-5-0, property-name-5-1 =
> property-value-5-1, property-name-5-2 = property-value-5-2, property-name-5-3
> = property-value-5-3, property-name-5-4 = property-value-5-4,
> property-name-5-5 = property-value-5-5, property-name-5-6 =
> property-value-5-6, property-name-5-7 = property-value-5-7, property-name-5-8
> = property-value-5-8, property-name-5-9 = property-value-5-9, node-5-3 = {
> ... }, node-5-4 = { ... }, node-5-9 = { ... }, node-5-1 = { ... }, node
