[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3222?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13194507#comment-13194507
]
Felix Meschberger commented on JCR-3222:
> The Sling authentication code needs to be
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3222?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13194180#comment-13194180
]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-3222:
I considered the OSGi whiteboard pattern for this,
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3222?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Felix Meschberger updated JCR-3222:
---
Attachment: JCR-3222-fmeschbe.patch
Proposed patch enhancing DavexServletService
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3222?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13194074#comment-13194074
]
Felix Meschberger commented on JCR-3222:
Unfortunately this is a compiled library an
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3222?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jukka Zitting updated JCR-3222:
---
Attachment: jackrabbit-jcr-server-2.6-SNAPSHOT.jar
Proposed patch.
> Allow servlet fil
Allow servlet filters to specify custom session providers
-
Key: JCR-3222
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3222
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
Issue Type: Improvem
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Michael Dürig wrote:
>
> Thanks for clarifying.
>
> To summarize (if I got it right) the revision parameter specifies the base
> revision for a three way merge of the transient changes into the current
> head revision.
correct
>
> So this can actually be used to
Thanks for clarifying.
To summarize (if I got it right) the revision parameter specifies the
base revision for a three way merge of the transient changes into the
current head revision.
So this can actually be used to implement 1) (see
http://markmail.org/message/e2ipk54t2bhrepab) right?
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3221?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Rohit Nijhawan updated JCR-3221:
Affects Version/s: 2.2.10
> Jackrabbit in Sling won't bootstrap against oracle
>
Jackrabbit in Sling won't bootstrap against oracle
--
Key: JCR-3221
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3221
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
Issue Type: Test
Compone
Thomas,
Thanks for the response. I did read the documentation and I think I got mixed
up the on the information about datastore vs persistence managers in that the
file based persistence managers are not atomic but the database persistence
managers are. And in my case even though I am using Fil
Hi,
>As I understood filesystem model doesn't provide atomocity i.e no
>transactional support
I'm not sure if you read the data store documentation at
http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/DataStore - the data store is
write-only, and doesn't require that much transactional support (what the
file sys
Stefan,
As I understood filesystem model doesn't provide atomocity i.e no transactional
support which may lead to corrupted nodes if there is a system crash for some
reason during saving. Is it still recommended in production environments?
Thanks
On Jan 26, 2012, at 1:40 PM, Stefan Guggisberg
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Michael Dürig wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Microkernel.commit() has a revisionId parameter. Could someone (Stefan?)
> clarify the semantics of this parameter? The Javadoc only says "revision the
> changes are based on". But it fails to explain the actual effect of that
> par
Hi,
>but you're right, the above scenario could/should be
>handled gracefully.
That makes sense. I have added a test case and changed the
MemoryKernelImpl in the sandbox.
Regards,
Thomas
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Michael Dürig wrote:
>
>> BTW: the current microkernel prototype doesn't consider concurrent
>> removal of a specific node a conflict, i.e. it already implements the
>> proposed behavior.
>
>
> Hmm no?
>
> String head = mk.getHeadRevision();
> head = mk.commi
BTW: the current microkernel prototype doesn't consider concurrent
removal of a specific node a conflict, i.e. it already implements the
proposed behavior.
Hmm no?
String head = mk.getHeadRevision();
head = mk.commit("/", "+\"qoo\":{}", head, "");
String r1 = mk.commit("/", "-\"q
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would try 1). I would not try 3) because the user wouldn't know which
> item conflicted (well he could parse the message, but that would be
> weird). Also, I would try to avoid a new API.
>
> For the case 'double delete' another so
This may lead to problems when a Session.save() fails due to the underlying
Microkernel.commit failing because it detected a conflict. Now there might
be some transient changes (like deletions) which can't be selectively undone
by the user. So the user is left with a transient space containing his
On 26.1.12 10:55, Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Michael Dürig wrote:
In an earlier discussion (probably offline), we decided to not implement
Item.refresh() since it doesn't go well with the MVCC model jr3 is based on.
I'd implement Item.refresh() like this:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Michael Dürig wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In an earlier discussion (probably offline), we decided to not implement
> Item.refresh() since it doesn't go well with the MVCC model jr3 is based on.
> Furthermore, JCR doesn't have an Item.undo() method for undoing changes.
plea
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Michael Dürig wrote:
> In an earlier discussion (probably offline), we decided to not implement
> Item.refresh() since it doesn't go well with the MVCC model jr3 is based on.
I'd implement Item.refresh() like this:
public void refresh(boolean keepChanges
Hi,
I would try 1). I would not try 3) because the user wouldn't know which
item conflicted (well he could parse the message, but that would be
weird). Also, I would try to avoid a new API.
For the case 'double delete' another solution is possible.
* session1 deleted node /test and does some oth
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Peri Subrahmanya
wrote:
> I am using JCR 2.3.7 (latest stable release) for storing large number of
> files. I am keeping the node sizes to 10K (requirement is to store upto 100M
> records) but I am seeing a performance issues no matter how I organize the
> node
24 matches
Mail list logo
