The Apache Jenkins build system has built Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix (build
#766)
Status: Failure
Check console output at
https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/766/ to view
the results.
Changes:
[tommaso] OAK-4055 - fixed subtree index use case, minor adjustments
On 2016-02-25 17:40, Ancona Francesco wrote:
Hello,
we’d like to study in deep queries and index. In particular is not so
clear, from documentation, what is indexed by default.
For instance if i create a new type of document (IdentityCard with name
IDC) with 2 new properties (idCard and idGener
Hello,
we'd like to study in deep queries and index. In particular is not so clear,
from documentation, what is indexed by default.
For instance if i create a new type of document (IdentityCard with name IDC)
with 2 new properties (idCard and idGeneralAnagrafic) are these data (ie
metadata) inde
> If 1.3.17 contains the same as 1.4.0 then why do we even want to create a
1.3.17 release?
I agree, if 1.3.17 == 1.4.0, cutting 2 releases makes very little sense.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Marcel Reutegger
wrote:
> Hi Davide,
>
> does that mean you want to create two releases? If 1.3.1
Hi Davide,
does that mean you want to create two releases? If 1.3.17
contains the same as 1.4.0 then why do we even want to
create a 1.3.17 release?
I think it would be easier if we just rename the 1.3.17
version in JIRA to 1.4 and you only have to create a
1.4.0 release.
Am I missing something?
Hello team,
I'm planning to cut Oak 1.3.17 and 1.4.0 on Monday 29th February around
10am GMT.
We currently have 1 blocker issue and 1 that is not blocker.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4012
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4043
This means I will defer the non-blocker and bl
On 25/02/2016 12:50, Francesco Mari wrote:
> I think it's a good idea. Feel free to adjust the pom.xml accordingly.
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4064
Cheers
Davide
On 2016-02-25 12:42, Ancona Francesco wrote:
Hi,
I had run the same test changing only the DocumentNodeStore type as in the
following code:
final DocumentMK.Builder builder = new DocumentMK.Builder();
builder.setBlobStore(createFileSystemBlobStore());
final DocumentNodeStore ns = getMongoDocu
I think it's a good idea. Feel free to adjust the pom.xml accordingly.
2016-02-25 12:48 GMT+01:00 Davide Giannella :
> Hello team,
>
> I just noticed that oak-remove when built with `clean install` (no
> -PintegrationTesting) execute the test in subject which by the name is
> an IT.
>
> Is it wha
Hello team,
I just noticed that oak-remove when built with `clean install` (no
-PintegrationTesting) execute the test in subject which by the name is
an IT.
Is it what we want? Shall we change it and run only in the IT profile?
Cheers
Davide
Hi,
to answer your question, I’d manually delete all the tables in the posgresql db
before running the test,
so the stacktrace is relative to a fresh start.
On a second run, without deleting the tables, I had a different type of
exception.
Best regards
-Messaggio originale-
Da: Alex Par
Hi,
I had run the same test changing only the DocumentNodeStore type as in the
following code:
final DocumentMK.Builder builder = new DocumentMK.Builder();
builder.setBlobStore(createFileSystemBlobStore());
final DocumentNodeStore ns = getMongoDocumentNodeStore(builder);
private DB db = new Mo
Hi,
I would add making sure the test uses a clean slate each time, meaning you
drop the db at the end and/or create fresh unique ones each time the test
runs (I don't see this happening in the current snippet).
this would protect you against weird artifacts.
alex
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:43 A
On 2016-02-25 11:30, Ancona Francesco wrote:
Yes.
We tried the following combination:
1) metadata on mongo and binary mongo
2) metadata on mongo and binary using filesystem
Best regards
It looks like the repository construction doesn't work (nodetype index
missing).
Can you double-check th
Yes.
We tried the following combination:
1) metadata on mongo and binary mongo
2) metadata on mongo and binary using filesystem
Best regards
-Messaggio originale-
Da: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.resc...@gmx.de]
Inviato: giovedì 25 febbraio 2016 10:56
A: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
On 25.2.16 9:06 , Tommaso Teofili wrote:
it seems we're having lots of test errors due to OOM ... we should try to
see if it's a Jenkins issue (low resources) or an Oak bug.
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4012
Michael
Regards,
Tommaso
Il giorno gio 25 feb 2016 alle ore 06:
On 2016-02-25 10:46, Ancona Francesco wrote:
Hi,
i wrote yesterday that we are making a lots of performance test on oak
and jackrabbit in order to select our target platform. We are going to
try with several plane tests; one of them is using oak with RDBMS
Postgres to store metadata.
...
Does
Hi,
i wrote yesterday that we are making a lots of performance test on oak and
jackrabbit in order to select our target platform. We are going to try with
several plane tests; one of them is using oak with RDBMS Postgres to store
metadata.
We found an exception when save a new node
(root.addNo
I'll have a look at the heap dump generated by the build...
Regards
Marcel
On 25/02/16 09:06, "Tommaso Teofili" wrote:
>it seems we're having lots of test errors due to OOM ... we should try to
>see if it's a Jenkins issue (low resources) or an Oak bug.
>
>Regards,
>Tommaso
>
>Il giorno gio 25
it seems we're having lots of test errors due to OOM ... we should try to
see if it's a Jenkins issue (low resources) or an Oak bug.
Regards,
Tommaso
Il giorno gio 25 feb 2016 alle ore 06:02 Apache Jenkins Server <
jenk...@builds.apache.org> ha scritto:
> The Apache Jenkins build system has buil
20 matches
Mail list logo
