Hi,

thanks Julian for the reply and the hint to the unstable Version.

In view of OAK, i struggled with the hint in the Backward Compatibility Page 
about "Node Name Length Limit" and 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2644

The Index Question is still interesting for me, maybe someone else has an 
update experience in this way.

Best regards. 
 

Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Juli 2017 um 11:22 Uhr
Von: "Julian Reschke" <[email protected]>
An: [email protected], [email protected]
Betreff: Re: Index rebuild necessary? / Jackrabbit Update
On 2017-07-18 13:29, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> we have a scenario with an old Jackrabbit Version 2.2.5
>
> Is it necessary to rebuild all the Lucene Indexes if we would like to upgrade 
> to an up to date Version (at the moment 2.15.4) due the different Lucene 
> Upgrades?

Can't help you with the indexing question but please note 2.15.4 is a
release from an unstable branch, so you should consider the latest 2.14
version.

> Is there a best practise / checklist for upgrading the Jackrabbit Version in 
> view of existing Contents / Structures? Do we have to do some kind of data 
> changes / preprocessing for the Upgrade Process?
>
> We have different Workspaces and some other restrictions (nodenames > 150 
> Chars..), so it is not so easy to upgrade to OAK.

Long node names are not a problem in Oak.

Best regards, Julian

Reply via email to