On 2017-05-18 05:45, Amit Jain wrote:
Hi,
I would like to backport OAK-6229 to 1.4 and 1.6 branches. This fixes a bug
where the 'datastorecheck' command throws an NPE when using the S3DataStore.
Thanks
Amit
+1
Best regards, Julian
PS: and do we *really* *really* need to ask for backports li
Hi,
I would like to backport OAK-6229 to 1.4 and 1.6 branches. This fixes a bug
where the 'datastorecheck' command throws an NPE when using the S3DataStore.
Thanks
Amit
On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 09:37 +, Michael Marth wrote:
> Hi Marco,
>
> Maybe I don’t understand correctly your use case, but would it be
> easier to simply write a script using the JCR API to do the changes
> in the repo?
>
> Michael
For bulk operations like that Sling Pipes is also an options
Hi Marco,
Maybe I don’t understand correctly your use case, but would it be easier to
simply write a script using the JCR API to do the changes in the repo?
Michael
On 16/05/17 18:33, "Marco Piovesana" wrote:
>Hi Tomek,
>yes I'm trying to upgrade within the same repository type but I can d
Okay, after looking further into this it is indeed as you explained, thanks!
> On 17 May 2017, at 09:42, Chetan Mehrotra wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Barry d'Hoine
> wrote:
>> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.cache.CacheLIRS
>
> The CacheLIRS instance is a cache and hence would be refe
Hello,
The main issue of delegating in entryCount, is that if the index contains
more than 1000 docs and the query does not contain fulltext clauses the
index planner will use the number *1000 *as the entryCount, ovewriting the
actual size of the index [Math.min(definition.getEntryCount(), getRead
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Barry d'Hoine
wrote:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.cache.CacheLIRS
The CacheLIRS instance is a cache and hence would be referring to a
big chunk of heap. Probably thats why MAT flags it. This alone does
not confirm its a memory leak. The reachable size via this obje
> Using the entryCount was our first option, but we decided to modify
> costPerEntry instead. Basically these are the reasons:
What I meant was not the use of "entryCount" property but just that
the sub index /nodeA/nodeB/includedC being a subset of /nodeA/nodeB/
it would have lower value for numD