[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-10503) Incorrect operand in incremental FFS can lead to failure during merge step
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10503?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=1675#comment-1675
]
Nitin Gupta edited comment on OAK-10503 at 10/25/23 5:11 AM:
-
trunk :
[https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/commit/e904e4594274f28fd7499ec1620648893b43d6b0]
, wasn't able to reproduce with a test case, but the fix of not throwing
exception is harmless and should work. Keeping this open to try and write the
reproducible test case as well.
Update - I think we can close this for now and revisit this once we can
reproduce this with a test case. For now the warnings should help us detect
more such cases without blocking building the incremental FFS.
was (Author: nitigup):
trunk :
[https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/commit/e904e4594274f28fd7499ec1620648893b43d6b0]
, wasn't able to reproduce with a test case, but the fix of not throwing
exception is harmless and should work. Keeping this open to try and write the
reproducible test case as well.
> Incorrect operand in incremental FFS can lead to failure during merge step
> --
>
> Key: OAK-10503
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10503
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Nitin Gupta
>Assignee: Nitin Gupta
>Priority: Major
>
> There could be a case where a node was moved/renamed which apparently results
> the incremental FFS to have 2 entries.
>
> For example,
> NodeA | \{"prop":"value"}
> renamed to NodeB | \{"prop":"value"}
>
> then the incremental FFS has entries -
> NodeA | \{"prop":"value"} | D
> NodeB | \{"prop":"value"} | M
>
> The second entry's operand should be A and not M.
> The above analysis is an assumption from some observations during some tests
> on a large repository.
> A more detailed test case needs to be written to investigate this further.
>
> But the impact of this is that merge for this inc store fails here
> [https://jira.corp.adobe.com/browse/GRANITE-48075#:~:text=https%3A//github.com/apache/jackrabbit%2Doak/blob/trunk/oak%2Drun%2Dcommons/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/index/indexer/document/incrementalstore/MergeIncrementalFlatFileStore.java%23L118]
> .
>
> A simple solution could be to treat modification same as addition.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-10503) Incorrect operand in incremental FFS can lead to failure during merge step
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10503?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Nitin Gupta resolved OAK-10503.
---
Fix Version/s: 1.60.0
Resolution: Fixed
> Incorrect operand in incremental FFS can lead to failure during merge step
> --
>
> Key: OAK-10503
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10503
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
>Reporter: Nitin Gupta
>Assignee: Nitin Gupta
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.60.0
>
>
> There could be a case where a node was moved/renamed which apparently results
> the incremental FFS to have 2 entries.
>
> For example,
> NodeA | \{"prop":"value"}
> renamed to NodeB | \{"prop":"value"}
>
> then the incremental FFS has entries -
> NodeA | \{"prop":"value"} | D
> NodeB | \{"prop":"value"} | M
>
> The second entry's operand should be A and not M.
> The above analysis is an assumption from some observations during some tests
> on a large repository.
> A more detailed test case needs to be written to investigate this further.
>
> But the impact of this is that merge for this inc store fails here
> [https://jira.corp.adobe.com/browse/GRANITE-48075#:~:text=https%3A//github.com/apache/jackrabbit%2Doak/blob/trunk/oak%2Drun%2Dcommons/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/index/indexer/document/incrementalstore/MergeIncrementalFlatFileStore.java%23L118]
> .
>
> A simple solution could be to treat modification same as addition.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-10509) Build Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1228 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17779024#comment-17779024 ] Hudson commented on OAK-10509: -- Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1239|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1239/] [console log|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1239/console] > Build Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1228 failed > -- > > Key: OAK-10509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson >Priority: Major > > No description is provided > The build Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1228 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk > #1228|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1228/] > [console > log|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1228/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-10265) Oak-run offline reindex - async lane revert not taking place for stored index def after index import
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10265?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Mueller updated OAK-10265: - Description: During offline reindex using oak-run, the index import phase first changes the async property to temp-async and keeps the original value in async-previous property. This is reverted when the import is done. However it appears that the revert doesn't happen for the stored index definition and leaves that at async = temp-async async-previous = [async, nrt] By setting "refresh=true", the stored index definition is copied to the regular index definition. was: During offline reindex using oak-run, the index import phase first changes the async property to temp-async and keeps the original value in async-previous property. This is reverted when the import is done. However it appears that the revert doesn't happen for the stored index definition and leaves that at async = temp-async async-previous = [async, nrt] We should probably add refresh=true to avoid this. > Oak-run offline reindex - async lane revert not taking place for stored index > def after index import > > > Key: OAK-10265 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10265 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: Nitin Gupta >Assignee: Nitin Gupta >Priority: Major > Fix For: 1.54.0 > > > During offline reindex using oak-run, > the index import phase first changes the async property to temp-async and > keeps the original value in async-previous property. > This is reverted when the import is done. However it appears that the revert > doesn't happen for the stored index definition and leaves that at > async = temp-async > async-previous = [async, nrt] > By setting "refresh=true", the stored index definition is copied to the > regular index definition. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-10509) Build Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1228 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10509?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17778996#comment-17778996 ] Hudson commented on OAK-10509: -- Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1238|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1238/] [console log|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1238/console] > Build Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1228 failed > -- > > Key: OAK-10509 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10509 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson >Priority: Major > > No description is provided > The build Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk #1228 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit/jackrabbit-oak-trunk > #1228|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1228/] > [console > log|https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit/job/jackrabbit-oak-trunk/1228/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-10504) Add indexing job total duration log message
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10504?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Nuno Santos resolved OAK-10504. --- Fix Version/s: 1.60.0 Resolution: Done > Add indexing job total duration log message > --- > > Key: OAK-10504 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10504 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: indexing >Reporter: Nuno Santos >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.60.0 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-10514) Utility method to remove unmerged branch changes
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10514?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Marcel Reutegger resolved OAK-10514. Fix Version/s: 1.60.0 Resolution: Fixed Merged the PR. > Utility method to remove unmerged branch changes > > > Key: OAK-10514 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-10514 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Task > Components: run >Reporter: Marcel Reutegger >Assignee: Marcel Reutegger >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.60.0 > > > Work on detailed revision garbage collection is still in progress. Until this > is finished a utility method in oak-mongo.js would be useful to remove > unmerged branch changes on a document. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)
